i;y»^;: 


PRXHGJSTOH 
.ttt0.,0GTl8b2 

TH5IOL0GIG&L 

BV  813  .K87  1840x^ 
Kurtz,  Benjamin,  1795-1865. 
Arguments,  derived  from 
sacred  scripture  and  sound 


"snr 


V^  4  \    *   . »    » 


DERIVED  FROM 

SACRED  SCRIPTURE  AND  SOUND  REASON, 

EXHIBITING  THE 

NECESSITF  AM)  ADVANTAGES 

OF 

INFANT   BAPTISM; 

AND    PROVING 

SPRINKLING  OR  AFFUSION 

TO    BE  THE  MOST  SCRIPTURAL  AND    APPROPRIATE    MODE    OF 
ADMINISTERING    IT  ; 

TOGETHER  WITH   A    NUMBER   OF 

ESSAYS  ON  IMPORTANT  SUBJECTS 
CONNECTED  WITH  BAPTIS3I. 


BY  BENJAMIN'KURTZ,  D.D 


BALTIMORE. 
PRINTED  AT  THE  PUBLICATION  ROOMS, 

No.  7,  S.  Liberty  street. 

1840. 


Entered  according  to  the  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1840, 

By  the  Publisher, 

In  the  Clerk's  office  of  the  District  Court  of  Maryland. 


PREFACE. 


The  following  pages  have  been  written  in  obedience 
to  a  "  Resolution''''  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Synod 
of  Maryland,  and  in  accordance  with  the  reiterated 
requests  of  personal  friends. 

In  preparing  them,  it  has  been  our  uniform  endeavor 
to  concentrate  the  largest  possible  amount  of  conclusive 
evidence  and  useful  information,  within  the  narrowest 
limits ;  and  also  to  adapt  our  language  and  reasoning  to 
the  capacity  of  the  plain  unlettered  reader,  in  order  thus 
to  meet  an  important  desideratum  in  the  church. 

If  in  some  cases,  the  nature  of  our  subject  compelled 
us  to  depart  from  this  course,  and  to  enter  into  a  train  of 
abstruse  argument  and  philological  criticism,  the  merits 
or  demerits  of  which  can  only  be  fully  estimated  by  the 
learned,  those  instances  are  by  no  means  so  frequent  as 
to  interfere  materially  with  the  popular  utility  of  the 
work.  We  therefore  indulge  the  hope,  that  our  investi- 
gations may  present  some  claim  to  the  attention  of  those, 
whose  want  of  time  or  inclination  forbids  the  task  of 
poring  over  ponderous  tomes  of  scholastic  erudition,  and 


iV  PREFACE. 

be  found  not  altogether  unworthy  the  notice  of  the  stu- 
dent and  divine. 

To  say  that  we  are  indifferent  as  to  the  judgment  that 
shall  be  pronounced  upon  our  efforts,  would  be  mere 
affectation  ; — we  are  not  indifferent.  We  cordially  de- 
sire that  they  may  be  well  received  by  the  church  gene- 
rally, and  particularly  by  that  class  of  individuals  for 
whose  special  benefit  we  have  mainly  labored ;  and 
above  all,  that  the  Master,  whose  glory  we  trust  we  are 
most  anxious  to  advance,  may  in  great  mercy,  smile 
upon  them,  and  by  his  blessing,  make  them  instrumental 
in  promoting  correct  views  on  the  interesting  questions 
M-liich  we  have  discussed. 

THE    AUTHOR, 


INFANT  BAPTISM. 

PART   FIRST. 


CHAPTER  I. 

BAPTISM    IN    GENERAL. 

Before  we  proceed  to  the  investigation  of  the  subject 
of  the  present  work,  a  few  preliminary  remarks  ex- 
planatory of  our  view  of  the  nature  of  baptism  in  gene- 
ral, are  deemed  necessary. 

Christian  baptism  is  a  sacrament  ordained  by  Christ 
as  the  sign  and  seal  of  God''s  covenant  tvith  his  people, 
and  a  formal  recognition  of  their  right  of  membership 
in  his  church. 

1.  Whether  we  define  a  sacrament  merely  as  an  ordi- 
nance by  which  we  are  formally  brought  under  an  obli- 
gation of  obedience  to  God,  and  which  obligation  is 
equally  sacred  with  an  oath,'  or  as  "an  outward  and  visi- 

^The  word  sacrament  is  derived  from  the  Latin  word  sacrame)xt- 
um,  which  was  adopted  to  signify  an  oath,  particularly  the  oalii 
taken  by  soldiers  to  be  true  to  their  country  and  general.  This 
word  has  other  significations,  but  it  is  in  this  sense  mainly,  if  not 
exclusively,  that  it  is  used  in  reference  to  baptism  and  the  Lord's 
supper,  in  which  Christians  may  be  said  to  bind  themselves  as  by  an 
oath,  or  tlie  most  sacred  vows,  to  obedience  to  God. 
1* 


6  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

ble  sign  of  an  inward  and  spiritual  grace  ;" — baptism  is 
equally  a  sacrament.  For  in  it  the  subject  either  per- 
sonally or  by  sponsors  acknowledges  God's  claims  on 
his  obedience,  and  solemnly  devotes  himself  to  his  ser- 
vice ;  and  it  is  obvious  that  tlie  water  applied  to  the  sub- 
ject, is  "  an  outward  and  visible  sign,"  and  diat  the  co- 
venant of  which  it  is  the  seal,  guarantees  the  richest 
spiritual  blessings.  Hence  baptism  is  to  all  intents  and 
purposes  a  sacrament. 

2.  If  it  be  maintained  that  a  sacrament  is  a  means  of 
grace,  we  add  that  such  is  plainly  the  nature  of  baptism. 
It  symbolically  represents  some  of  the  most  important 
truths  of  the  gospel,  and  that  too  in  a  very  striking  and 
forcible  manner ;  and  as  divine  truth  is  the  principal 
means  of  grace,  it  is  evident  that  baptism  must  necessa- 
rily partake  of  tliis  nature.  Moreover,  its  administration 
is  connected  with  God's  word  and  prayer,  which  in 
themselves  are  the  most  efficient  means  of  grace  ;  hence 
it  follows  that  it  must  likewise  be  a  means  as  well  as  a 
seal  of  grace. 

3,  It  is  also  a  sign  and  seal  of  God's  covenant  zvith 
his  people.  The  covenant  here  alluded  to,  is  that  which 
was  solemnly  entered  into  with  Abraham,  nearly  two 
thousand  years  anterior  to  the  Christian  era:*  '■^  And  I 
nnll  establish  my  covenant  between  me  and  thee,  and 
thy  seed  after  thee,  in  their  generations,  for  an  cverlast' 
ing  covenant,  to  be  a  God  unto  thee,  and  to  thy  seed 
after  thee.'^  Of  this  covenant,  circumcision  was  the  ori- 
ginal sign  and  seal:^  "And  he  that  is  eight  days  old 
shall  be  circumcised,"  &c.  But  when  Christ  appeared, 
the  old  dispensation,  having  fulfilled  its  grand  design, 
was  set  aside  to  give  place  to  the  new  one ;  the  church 

'Gen.  xvii.  7.  ^Gen,  xvii.  12. 


BAPTISM    IN    GENERAL.  7 

assumed  a  difterent  aspect ;  its  external  ordinances,  its 
ceremonies,  sacrifices,  etc.,  which  referred  to  and  pre- 
figured him  especially  in  his  mediatorial  character,  were 
necessarily  abolished,  because  they  all  centered  and  re- 
ceived their  accomplishment  in  him.  Circumcision, 
one  of  the  ordinances  of  tlie  old  economy,  shared  the 
same  fate  ;  it  was  annulled  to  make  room  for  Christian 
baptism,  an  institution  better  adapted  to  the  simplicity, 
increased  light  and  more  "  easy  yoke"  of  the  New 
Testament  economy.  The  Abrahamic  covenant  how- 
ever, usually  denominated  "the  covenant  of  grace," 
was  not  and  could  not  be  abrogated,  because  that  was 
designed  to  be  an  "  everlasting  covenant."  While 
the  covenant  therefore,  by  which  the  church  of  God 
was  organized,  continued  substantially  the  same,  the 
sign  and  seal  of  that  covenant  was  altered  ;  circumcision 
was  repealed  and  baptism  substituted,  as  will  hereafter 
be  more  fully  proved.  Hence  baptism  is,  as  we  have 
defined  it,  a  sign  and  seal  of  GoiVs  covenant  ivith  his 
j)eople. 

4.  It  is  further  a  ybrmaZ  recognition  of  membership 
in  the  church  of  God.  Baptism  is  almost  universally 
spoken  of  as  an  initiatory  rite,  or  a  means  of  intro- 
ducing individuals  to  membership  in  the  church.  With 
certain  limitations,  this  mode  of  I'epresenting  it  may  be 
admissible,  but  if  strictly  interpreted  it  is  calculated 
to  convey,  and  in  numerous  instances  has  conveyed,  an 
unscriptural  and  consequently  erroneous  view  of  the  sub- 
ject. Children  are  members  of  the  visible  church  of 
God  through  the  merits  of  Christ's  atonement  and  in 
virtue  of  their  birth  from  Christian  parents  or  of  their 
being  brought  umler  Christian  guardianship,  and  there- 
fore have  no  need  to  be  made  members  by  baptism.     With 


8  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

regard  to  adults,  whether  heathen  or  inhabitants  of  a 
Christian  country,  they  are  always  previously  instructed 
in  the  precepts  of  the  gospel  and  required  to  profess 
their  faith  in  it,  prior  to  their  baptism  ;  and  it  is  this  pro- 
fession, and  not  their  baptism,  that  constitutes  them 
members  of  God's  true  church.  By  baptism  they  are,  in 
a  very  solemn  and  impressive  manner,  recognized  and 
publicly  proclaimed  as  members  of  the  church ;  hence  we 
prefer  describing  baptism  as  a  formal  recognition  of 
church-membership,  rather  than  as  an  initiatory  rite. 

The  idea  here  advanced  may  be  illustrated  by  the  fol- 
lowing fact  :  In  Europe  there  is  a  "Traveller's  Society," 
the  constitution  of  which  declares  that  every  person  of 
good  character  who  has  travelled  in  foreign  countries  to 
a  certain  extent,  shall  be  a  member.  The  mode  of  ad- 
mission is  thus :  the  member  subscribes  the  constitution  ; 
a  mark  is  made  on  his  right  arm  Avith  indelible  ink  ;  his 
name  is  added  to  the  list  of  recorded  members,  and  he 
receives  a  certificate  of  membership.  (This  may  in 
some  sense  be  termed  an  initiatory  ceremony.)  If  he 
neglect  to  lay  claim  to  his  membership  in  due  time,  he 
forfeits  it.  From  this  statement  it  is  evident,  that  every 
traveller  of  a  certain  description  is  a  member  of  the  so- 
ciety, and  can  rfemanrf  admission;  that  if  he  neglect  to  do 
so  he  loses  his  membership,  which  however,  by  a  com- 
pliance with  certain  requisitions,  may  be  regained ;  and 
that  before  he  can  participate  in  the  rights  and  honors  of 
the  society,  he  must  submit  to  a  prescribed  form  in 
which  his  membership  is  openly  recognized  and  his 
obligations  as  one  of  the  parties  constituting  the  associa- 
tion are  sealed.  It  is  manifest  that  it  is  not  the  cerem^ony 
of  initiation,  but  his  having  performed  certain  journeys, 
visited  certain  cities,  &c.,  that  made  him  a  member ;  and 


BAPTISM   IN    GENERAL.  9 

his  initiation  is  no  more  than  a  formal  recognition  and 
ratification  of  membership  previously  possessed.  So 
chikh-en  are  members  of  God's  church  in  virtue  of 
Christ's  merits  and  their  birth  from  Christian  parents  ; 
God's  covenant  with  Abraham,  made  nearly  forty  centuries 
ago,  and  never  revoked,  constitutes  them  members,  and 
when  baptized  their  membership  is  set  forth  and  so- 
lemnly certified.  We  indeed  readily  admit  that  the 
analogy  in  the  foregoing  illustration  is  not  perfect,  but 
Ave  think  it  sufficiently  so  to  answer  our  purpose. 

In  support  of  this  view,  we  must  be  permitted  to  offer 
a  few  remarks.  The  covenant  with  Abraham,  which  is 
confessedly  still  in  force,  being  emphatically  an  "  ever- 
lasting covenant, ^^  embraces  his  "  seed  in  all  genera- 
tions,^^ as  well  as  himself,  consequently  his  infant  off- 
spring and  that  of  all  his  posterity  were  included  as  sub- 
jects of  this  covenant,  or  in  other  words,  as  members  of 
the  church  of  God,  and  that  by  virtue  of  their  birth  from 
Ci  chosen  and  godly  parentage,  or  of  their  being  placed 
under  a  godly  influence.  It  was  not  circumcision  there- 
fore, that  entitled  the  pious  patriarch  and  his  children,  or 
the  slave-child  born  of  Avorthless  parents  but  brought 
under  Jewish  protection,'  to  church-membership,  but  the 
stipulations  of  the  covenant.  Circumcision  however  was 
the  sign  and  seal  of  the  covenant,  and  must  therefore  be 
regarded  as  a  solemn  token  of  membership.  Apply  this 
elucidation  to  baptism,  and  the  idea  we  wish  to  impart 
will  be  easily  apprehended, 

'It  should  be  borne  in  raind  that  God  also  required  the  children 
of  heathen  parents  to  be  circumcised,  if  by  slavery  or  otherwise, 
those  children  were  brought  under  Jewish  control.  "  He  that  is 
born  in  thy  house,  and  he  that  is  bought  icilh  thy  money,  must  needs 
be  circumcised."    Gen.  xvii.  12,  13  ;  see  also  Exod.  xii.  48. 


10  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

This  exhibition  of  the  subject  receives  irresistible  force 
from  the  fact  that  God  ordained,  that  if  any,  whether  in- 
fant or  adult,  should  not  be  circumcised,  <■' that  soul 
should  be  cut  off  from  his  people  f  because,  it  is  added, 
"Ae  hath  broken  my  voiv."  Here  then  it  is  clearly- 
manifest,  that  the  individual  so  "cut  off,"  in  consequence 
of  non-circumcision,  must  previously  and  independently 
of  circumcision,  have  belonged  to  God's  people  ; — have 
been  a  subject  of  the  covenant,  and  member  of  the 
church ;  or  how,  on  any  other  supposition,  could  he  be 
exscinded,  or  be  said  to  have  broken  his  vow?  Who  then 
must  not  plainly  perceive,  that  church-membership  exist- 
ed prior  to  circumcision,'  and  that  the  latter  was,  strictly 
speaking,  only  the  recognition  of  the  former  ?  In  like 
manner,  the  children  of  Christian  parents  are  by  birth, 
in  virtue  of  God's  covenant,  members  of  his  church,  and 
when  baptism  is  administered,  their  membership  is  pub- 
licly signified  and  the  covenant  of  grace  sealed. 

Some  additional  light  may  be  reflected  on  this  sub- 
ject, by  a  reference  to  the  established  usages  of  civil  life. 
A  number  of  individuals  in  a  state  are  chosen  members 
of  Congress ;  they  are  termed  "  members  elect,"  and 
are  members  in  full  so  far  as  "the  sovereign  people," 
the  source  of  all  power  in  a  republic,  can  make  them 
such ;  but  they  cannot  claim  a  right  to  the  exercise  of 
their  official  privileges,  until  they  shall  have  complied 
with  certain  forms  prescribed  by  the  constitution.  Evi- 
dently it  is  not  these  forms  that  elevate  them  to  their 
office,  but  the  voice  of  the  people ;  the  forms  however 
may  be  regarded  in  a  sense  as  a  seal  of  their  member- 
ship, and  should  they  refuse  to  comply  with  them  they 

'Abraham  was  a  subject  of  God's  covenant  fourteen  years  before 
circumcision  was  instituted. 


BAPTISM   IN   GENERAL.  11 

would  be  "  cut  off"  or  excluded  from  the  enjoyment  of 
their  membership.  So  children  of  Christian  parents  are 
members  of  God's  church  in  virtue  of  his  election  of 
them  through  Christ  to  that  dignity  in  the  covenant  of 
grace,  and  baptism  is  the  seal  of  that  covenant,  the  vow 
of  fidelity  to  it,  and  of  course,  a  public  recognition  of 
their  membership. 

This  is  perhaps  as  suitable  a  place  as  any  other  to 
observe,  that  the  common  English  version  of  the  words  of 
the  institution  of  baptism,'  is  confessedly  erroneous ; — 
the  Avord,  i^aOyinvatzTs  means,  to  disciple  or  make  disciples, 
and  hence  the  passage  should  be  rendered  thus :  "Go 
ye  therefore  and  disciple  (or  make  disciples  of)  all  nations, 
baptizing  for,  and  baptize)  them  in  the  name,"*  &c.; 
the  monosyllable  "by"  frequently  inserted  immediately 
before  baptizing,  is  an  interpolation  not  found  in  the 
original  and  conveys  a  wrong  idea. 

These  words  present  baptism  to  us  as  an  ordinance  to 
be  administered  originally  by  the  aposdes,  and  subse- 
quently by  the  ministers  of  the  gospel ;  for  what  was  the 
duty  of  the  apostles  in  this  case,  is  equally  the  duty  of 
all  succeeding  ministers.  Moreover,  the  office  of  bap- 
tizing was  entrusted  to  the  same  individuals  who  were 
commissioned  to  "teach"  or  preach  the  gospel,  and  these 
were  the  pastors  of  the  church,  hence  they  and  they 
alone  are  warranted  under  ordinary  circumstances  to  per- 

'Matt.  xxviii.  19,  20. 

^There  can  be  no  dispute  concerning  this  translation,  as  the  ablest 
and  most  respectable  philologists  bear  harmonious  testimony  to  its 
correctness.  Examples  of  a  like  construction  of  the  present  parti- 
'Ciple  are  of  constant  occurrence  in  the  New  Testament.  Thus, 
Matt.  XV.  25,  *H  Je  saSou?*  cTgo«xuva  a.uTa>  Kiycv;a., "  but  she  came  and 
worshipped  him  and  said,''  &c.  See  also  Matt.  xi.\.  3,  and  many 
other  similar  instances. 


13  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

form  this  office ;  and  the  more  so,  as  a  commission  to 
perform  any  specific  work,  on  prudential  grounds  at  least, 
excludes  all  upon  whom  that  commission  has  not  been 
conferred. 

We  hope  we  shall  be  pardoned  for  here  introducing  a 
few  remarks,  which,  though  not  perhaps  legitimately  con- 
nected with  the  argument,  are  yet  not  irrelevant.  In 
some  of  the  ancient  liturgies  of  the  Lutheran  church  in 
Germany,  we  find  provision  made  for  the  administration 
of  baptism  in  cases  of  "  extreme  necessity "  by  7nid- 
wives.  This  practice  was  originally  intoroduced  by  the 
church  of  Rome.  In  that  church  it  is  maintained  that 
children,  dying  without  baptism,  are  not  saved,  but  have 
a  place  allotted  them  in  Limbus,  the  ante-chamber  of 
liell ;  and  hence  the  intense  solicitude  of  its  members  to 
have  their  children  baptized  even  by  a  female,  rather  than 
that  they  should  die  without  receiving  the  ordinance. 
This  unscriptural  view  has  been  rejected  by  the  Luther- 
ans, but  they  nevertheless  hold  in  Germany  to  what  is 
termed  ^^  Nothtaiife,"  that  is,  private  baptism  by  the 
midwife  in  cases  of  extreme  necessity.  They  do  not 
pretend  that  there  is  a  divine  command  or  any  express 
authority  for  this  doctrine.  Baptism,  they  conceive,  is  a 
consecration  of  the  child,  not  to  a  secular  but  to  a  spirit- 
ual kingdom,  yea  to  God's  eternal  kingdom  in  glory,  and 
hence,  it  is  deemed  highly  proper  that  every  infant  should 
be  baptized,  though  its  temporal  existence  should  endure 
but  for  an  hour.  Moreover,  it  is  regarded  as  a  source  of 
precious  consolation  to  parents  to  reflect,  that  their  chil- 
dren, who  are  hurried  hence  immediately  after  they  open 
their  eyes  upon  this  world,  have  received  the  seal  of 
God's  gracious  covenant,  and  been  solemnly  dedicated  to 
him  in  his  own  appointed  ordinance.     The  hope  of  a 


BAPTISM    IN    GENERAL.  13 

glorious  re-union  seems  to  be  thereby  strengthened,  and 
thus  an  invisible  bond  between  the  living  and  the  dead  is 
cherished  through  the  power  of  the  gospel.  From  all 
this  it  is  inferred,  that  children  should  by  all  means  be 
baptized  if  they  survive  their  birth  long  enough  to  admit 
of  it ;  and  if  the  services  of  a  minister  of  the  gospel  can- 
not be  procured  in  time,  it  is  thought  better  that  the  ordi- 
nance should  be  administered  by  a  pious  midwife  than  be 
altogether  neglected. 

But  in  the  church  in  Germany  where  this  practice  still 
obtains,  the  most  judicious  measures  are  pursued  in  order 
to  secure  the  assistance  of  midwives  of  adequate  profes- 
sional and  moral  qualifications.  The  civil  authority  takes 
cognizance  of  tlie  subject,  and  has  adopted  wise  and  effi- 
cient regulations  in  reference  to  it.  A  midwife  is  re- 
quired to  be  an  educated  and  intelligent  woman,  who  has 
herself  given  birth  to  children ;  she  must  not  only  be  in 
high  repute  for  patience,  meekness,  diligence,  skill,  &;c. 
but  also  afford  undoubted  evidences  of  piety.  Physicians 
duly  appointed  for  the  purpose,  examme  and  decide  as  to 
her  professional  ability,  and  the  clergy  must  pronounce 
upon  her  moral  and  religious  character.  They  must 
moreover  be  women  of  ample  experience  in  other  res- 
pects as  well  as  in  personal  religion,  and  it  is  a  part  of 
tlie  duty  assigned  them,  to  impart  consolation  and  en- 
couragement to  the  patient,  to  pray  with  her,  &c.  Every 
species  of  superstition  and  quackery  is  strictly  prohibit- 
ed. Such  is  the  character  of  licensed  midwives  in  Ger- 
many ;  and  in  special  cases,  such  as  have  been  mention- 
ed above,  it  belongs  to  their  office  to  administer  baptism. 
But  if  a  regular  minister  can  possibly  be  procured  during 
the  probable  lifetime  of  the  child,  they  are  relieved  from 
tills  duty, 
2 


14  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

Should  the  child  after  such  baptism  be  restored  to 
health,  it  is  subsequently  carried  to  the  church,  where 
testimony  is  publicly  borne  to  the  fact  of  its  baptism ; 
the  ordinance  however,  is  not  repeated,  but  sanctioned 
and  confinned  by  the  officiating  minister.  The  cere- 
mony on  such  occasions  is  exceedingly  interesting  and 
impressive ;  but  it  would  lead  to  too  long  a  digression 
to  repeat  the  form. 

One  of  the  arguments  adduced  in  support  of  the  fore- 
going usage,  is  the  fact  that  on  occasion  of  the  sickness 
of  Moses,  his  wife  Zipora  performed  circumcision  on 
their  child,  Avhich  in  ordinary  circumstances,  was  the 
prerogative  of  the  father.  But  our  object  is  not  to  de- 
fend the  practice,  but  simply  to  state  it,  and  to  remark, 
that  though  we  are  not  aware  that  it  prevails  in  the  Lu- 
theran church  in  this  country,  yet  thei'e  are  some  who  ap- 
prove of  it.  That  it  obtains  in  the  church  of  England, 
is  known  to  most  readers.  We  do  not  at  present  either 
advocate  or  condemn  it,  and  think  we  have  expressed 
ourselves  with  sufficient  definiteness  in  a  preceding  para- 
graph, as  to  the  class  of  individuals  to  whom  in  ordinary 
circumstances,  the  duty  of  administering  baptism  proper- 
ly belongs.  After  this  slight  digression,  we  return  to  our 
main  subject. 

Water  was  selected  by  our  Lord  as  the  sign  in  bap- 
tism, for  very  obvious  reasons.  It  is  a  striking  emblem 
of  moral  purification,  and  therefore  admirably  adapted  to 
set  forth  the  import  of  this  sacrament  and  the  obligations 
of  its  subjects;  it  was  in  previous  use  at  the  "divers 
baptisms"  which  existed  among  the  Jcavs  under  the  law, 
and  it  may  be  had  without  cost  and  in  all  countries. 
Having  been  wisely  chosen  by  the  Divine  Author  of  bap- 
tism, we  have  no  more  right  to  substitute  sand  or  milk  or 


BAPTISM    IX    GENERAL.  15 

any  thing  else  for  water,  than  we  have  to  change  the  out- 
ward elements  of  the  holy  supper.  If  these  elements 
cannot  be  procured,  the  irremediable  want  of  them  ab- 
solves us  from  the  obligation  of  celebrating  the  sacra- 
ments. Our  Lord  never  required  impossibilities  from 
his  disciples. 

The  water  must  be  applied  in  the  name  of  the  Triune 
God, — Father,  Son  and  Holy  Ghost ;  the  baptism  of  all 
those  who  do  not  believe  in  the  Trinity,  and  cannot  there- 
fore consistently  baptize  in  the  name  of  the  Great  Tliree- 
One  God,  is  unscriptural, — is  not  Christian  baptism. 

The  practice  of  baptizing  organs,  bells  and  other  inani- 
mate objects,  is  so  gross  a  perversion  that  it  is  not  worthy 
of  serious  refutation;  the  command  of  Christ  as  Avell  as 
the  example  of  the  apostles  and  their  immediate  success- 
ors, plainly  limits  its  administration  to  human  beings. 

Adidts  are  required  in  the  Scriptures  to  profess  their 
faith  in  Jesus  Christ  prior  to  baptism,  that  is,  to  make  a 
public  declaration  of  their  cordial  belief  in  the  doctrines 
and  precepts  of  the  gospel,  Avhich  is  usually  in  this 
country  denominated  a  Profession  of  Religion  ;  for  the 
command  in  reference  to  them  is,  to  disciple  them,  not 
however  by  baptizing  them,  as  is  generally  maintained, 
but  by  preaching  the  gospel  to  them ;  and  so  soon  as  they 
embrace 'the  gospel  or  profess  faith  in  the  Messiah,  bap- 
tism is  to  be  administered.  The  apostles  undoubtedly 
understood  Christ's  command  thus ;  for  Peter  called  upon 
the  Jews  to  repent  and  then  be  baptized ;  Philip  did  not 
baptize  the  eunuch  until  he  professed  faith ;  Lydia  was 
not  baptized  until  the  Lord  had  opened  her  heart;  the 
jailor  was  baptized  in  consequence  of  his  faith;  so  was 
Paul;  so  were  Cornelius  and  his  household. 


16  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

Infants  obviously  come  under  a  different  rule.  They 
are  incapable  of  professing  faith,  and  are  accordingly  bap- 
tized on  the  profession  of  their  parents,  or  of  those  who 
offer  them  to  God  in  baptism,  and  who  are  their  proper 
and  authorized  representatives  in  this  transaction. 

All  the  Israelites  made  public  profession  of  the  religion 
of  the  Scriptures ;  all  were  circumcised  and  regularly 
celebrated  the  passover ;  if  they  neglected  to  do  so  they 
were  "  cut  off;"  hence,  in  ordinary  circumstances  no 
children  but  those  of  professing  Jcavs  and  those  under 
Jewish  guardianship  could  lawfully  be  recognized  as 
members  of  the  church  and  receive  the  seal  of  the  cove- 
nant of  grace  under  the  old  dispensation  ;  and  unless 
that  covenant  in  this  respect  has  been  altered,  (which  has 
not  been,  and  never  can  be  proved,)  it  follows  irresistibly 
that  no  children  but  those  of  professing  Christians  and 
such  as  are  brought  under  Christian  influence  can  lawfully 
receive  the  seal  (which  is  baptism)  of  the  same  covenant 
under  the  new  dispensation.  Peter  declares  that  the  pro- 
mise is  to  as  7nany  (and  their  children)  as  the  Lord  our 
God  shall  call;^  as  all  are  bound  to  obey  the  call  he  must 
have  alluded  to  such ;  but  obedience  to  the  call  implies 
a  profession  of  faith,  hence  baptism,  strictly  speaking, 
belongs  only  to  those  who  profess  the  religion  of  the 
Bible,  and  to  their  children  and  wards,  or  such  as  are 
under  their  care ;  so  affirms  the  apostle  in  language  that 
can  hardly  be  misunderstood.  Paul  teaches,  that  if  both 
parents  be  unbelievers,  that  is,  heathens,  their  children 
are  unclean,^  that  is,  are  not  members  of  the  visible 
church  of  God,  and  may  not  be  offered  to  him  in  bap- 
tism, unless  made  clean  by  their  adoption  into  a  Chris- 
tian family  or  by  their  being  brought  under  Christian  in- 

'Acts  ii.  39.  ^1  Cor.  vii.  14. 


BAPTISM    IN    GENERAL.  17 

fluence.  But  if  any  one  of  them  be  a  believer,  then  are 
the  children  holy,  (in  an  ecclesiastical  sense,)  that  is, 
they  are  members  of  the  church  of  God  to  which  the 
believing  parent  is  united  in  virtue  of  his  or  her  profes- 
sion, and  must  in  consequence  of  this  relation,  be  de- 
voted to  him  in  baptism. 

It  is  in  vain  to  object  to  this  view  of  the  subject  on 
the  supposition  that  children  are  entitled  to  baptism  in 
their  oivn  right  and  independently  of  any  relation  to 
their  parents  ;  for  not  only  can  no  such  right  be  found  in 
tlie  original  stipulations  of  the  covenant,  but  the  very 
idea  is  subversive  of  the  great  design  of  baptism.  On  the 
above  supposition  ministers  would  be  bound  to  adminis- 
ter it  to  the  children  of  infidel  and  heathen  parents, 
whether  they  renounced  their  infidelity  and  heathenism 
or  not ! — and  Avould  not  this  defeat  one  of  the  principal 
objects  of  this  holy  ordinance? — No,  like  circumcision, 
it  is  "a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith,"  and  therefore 
presupposes  the  exercise  of  at  least  historical  faith ;  but 
it  is  impossible  for  infant  children  to  believe,  and  hence 
it  is  on  a  profession  of  faith  made  by  those  who  present 
them  in  the  ordinance,  that  they  can  be  baptized.  If  it 
be  contended  that  as  children  were  universally  circum- 
(used  under  the  law,  so  they  ought  to  be  universally  bap- 
tized under  the  gospel ;  our  reply  is,  that  the  circumcis- 
ion of  children  was  precisely  co-extensive  with  a  profes- 
sion of  the  religion  of  the  Bible  on  the  part  of  parents, 
and  the  same  rule  should  govern  in  the  administration  of 
baptism;  for  it  is  in  every  case,  this  profession  which 
gives  the  right,  in  the  church,  to  this  ordinance.  If  pa- 
rents refuse  to  believe  in  the  gospel,  how  can  they  dedi- 
cate their  children  to  the  service  of  its  divine  Author  ?  if 
2* 


18  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

their  heart  be  radically  wrong  in  the  one  case,  can  it  be 
right  in  the  other  ? — In  vain  will  it  be  pretended  that  they 
love  their  offspring  more  than  themselves,  or  that  they 
can  perform  an  act  of  religious  duty  on  their  behalf, 
which  they  cannot  perform  on  their  own. 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  add  concerning  this  profes- 
sion, that  it  should  be  sincere ;  or  that  those  who  make 
it  ought  to  mean  all  that  is  ordinarily  intended  by  the 
profession. 

The  want  of  such  sincerity  however,  though  it  incul- 
pates the  hypocritical  professors,  cannot  affect  the  valid- 
ity of  the  ordinance.  It  is  to  be  feared  that  Jewish  chil- 
dren Avere  often  circumcised  while  their  parents  did  not 
exercise  genuine  faith,  yet  the  circumcision  was  neither 
invalidated  nor  rendered  unmeaning  on  that  account.  It 
is  sufficient  for  the  visible  administration  that  faith  is 
visibly  professed.  The  Baptists  no  doubt  often  admin- 
ister baptism  to  adults  who  are  not  honest  in  their  pro- 
fessions, but  they  do  not  consider  such  dishonesty  as  di- 
vesting the  ordinance  of  either  its  warrant  or  its  meaning. 

We  cannot  close  this  chapter,  written  more  than  a  year 
ago,  without  quoting  a  passage  from  an  article  in  a  late 
number  of  the  Biblical  Repository,  which,  so  far  as  it 
goes,  entirely  accords  with  the  views  just  expressed: 
♦'It  is  a  common  sentiment,"  says  that  writer,  "that  the 
baptism  of  children  makes  them  members  of  the  church, 
but  this  is  an  error  ;  their  baptism  does  not  make  them 
members,  it  only  recognizes  their  right  of  membership 
already  existing ;  their  membership  is  not  founded  upon 
their  baptism,  but  their  baptism  upon  their  membership  ; 
and  whether  that  seal  of  the  covenant  be  applied  to  them 
or  not,  they  are  (in  the  case  of  believing  parents)  not 
"  without"  but  within  the  pale  of  the  church.     Is  any 


BAPTISM    IN    GENERAL.  19 

one  here  disposed  to  object,  "how  can  children  be  mem- 
bers of  the  church  without  their  own  consent  ?"  I 
reply,  that  with  equal  propriety  it  might  be  asked,  how 
can  they  be  members  of  the  civil  state,  or  created  rational 
beings,  without  their  own  consent.  It  is  their  "  birth- 
right," their  privilege,  and  none  the  less  such  because  it 
is  a  common  one  or  greatly  perverted."  See  Bib.  Rep. 
for  Oct.  1839,  Art.  III.  by  Rev.  S.  Helfenstein,  p.  314. 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE    CHURCH    OF    COD. 

Having  had  repeated  occasion  to  use  the  phrase, 
church  of  God,  and  as  it  will  often  occur  in  our  future 
investigations,  it  may  be  useful  to  ascertain  the  several 
meanings  attached  to  it. 

The  expression,  church  of  God,  is  frequently  synony- 
mous with  kingdom  of  God  and  kingdom  of  heaven. 

1.  The  visible  church  or  kingdom  of  God  signifies 
the  aggi-egate  body  of  all  those  who  profess  the  true 
religion,  and  of  their  infant  offspring,  1  Cor.  xii.  28  ;  xv. 
9,  &c.  The  whole  of  this  body  comprehends  all  Chris- 
tian nations,  but  constitutes  only  one  society,  of  Avhich 
the  Bible  is  the  statute  book;  Jesus  Christ  the  Head; 
and  a  covenant  relation  the  uniting  bond. 

2.  The  invisible  church  comprises  all  those  of  every 
denomination  in  the  world,  who  are  thoroughly  converted 
to  God,  whether  in  a  state  of  imperfection  and  conflict 
on  earth,  or  of  perfect  holiness  and  glory  in  heaven. 
Eph.  v.  24—27 ;  Heb.  xii.  23. 

3.  The  term  church  also  denotes  any  body  of  profess- 
ing Christians  who  live  together  in  the  same  city  or 
vicinity,  and  worship  in  the  same  or  in  different  houses. 
Acts  xi.  22 ;  xiii.  1;   1  Cor.  i.  2  ;  Gal.  i.  2. 

4.  It  is  also  used  in  a  denominational  sense,  signifying  a 
whole  Christian  community,  who  hold  to  the  same  creed 
or  confession  and  are  united  in  the  same  mode  of  worship 
or  discipline.     This  is  a  more  modern  application  of  the 


THE    CHURCH    OF    GOD.  21 

word,  and  it  is  in  this  sense  that  we  speak  of  the  Lutheran 
church,  the  Presbyterian  church,  the  church  of  Eng- 
land— of  Scotland — of  Rome,  &c. 

.  5.  It  yet  further  designates  a  congregation  of  Chris- 
tians who  worship  together  in  the  same  place  and  under 
the  same  minister.     Col.  iv.  15  ;  Rom.  xvi.  5. 

We  cannot  recollect  that  the  phrase  is  ever  used  in 
the  Bible  to  denote  the  building  or  hoicse  of  worship, 
although  by  metonymy  it  is  often  thus  employed  in  the 
present  day ;  some  think  it  is  used  in  this  sense  in 
1  Cor.  xi.  22;  but  to  us  it  appears  very  doubtful,  espe- 
cially as  we  do  not  read  that  houses  of  public  worship 
were  erected  at  so  early  a  period  as  that  at  which  the 
aposde  penned  his  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians. 

Accordingly,  when  we  say  that  baptism  is  a  formal 
token  of  membership  in  the  church  of  God,  we  do  not 
mean  that  a  baptized  person  is  necessarihj  a  member  of 
the  invisible  church,  or  of  the  Lutheran  church,  or  of 
tlie  Presbyterian  church,  &c.,  but  of  the  church  of  God 
in  its  most  enlarged  acceptation ;  and  he  may  also,  and 
indeed  is  bound  to  be,  a  member  of  the  invisible  church  ; 
at  the  same  time  he  may  be  a  member  of  the  Lutheran, 
or  of  some  other  denominational  church. 

Again,  a  person  baptized  in  the  Romish  or  Greek 
church,  or  in  the  church  of  England,  and  communing  in 
that  church,  is  not  of  course  a  member  of  the  church  of 
Scotland,  or  of  the  German  Reformed  church. 

Further,  a  person  baptized  in  the  Presbyterian  church 
in  Philadelphia,  and  in  good  standing  there,  is  not  neces- 
sarily a  member  of  the  Prebyterian  church  in  Baltimore, 
for  he  has  no  right  to  vote  or  perform  any  other  act  of 
membership  in  that  church  on  the  mere  ground  of  his 


22  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

membership  in  the  former  place,  unless  it  be  occasional 
communion,  and  that  by  special  permission. 

Once  more,  an  infant  baptized  by  a  particular  minister 
is  not  necessarily  a  member  of  the  church  over  which 
that  minister  presides ;  it  may  be  the  child  of  parents 
belonging  to  some  other  church,  or  even  some  other 
Christian  denomination,  and  must  be  regarded  as  a  mem- 
ber in  the  church  of  its  parents  or  guardians. 

A  Lutheran  from  New  York  may,  in  adult  age,  be 
baptized  by  a  Lutlieran  minister  in  Baltimore,  and  thus 
receive  the  token  of  membership  in  the  visible  church  of 
God,  and  yet  have  no  intention  of  becoming  a  communi- 
cant in  the  Lutheran  church,  or,  in  other  words,  never 
acquire  a  right  to  perform  acts  of  membership  in  it. 

Thus  also  a  student  of  divinity  may  be  solemnly  set 
apart  to  the  gospel  ministry,  but  this  does  not  constitute 
him  a  minister  of  a  particular  church,  but  of  the  church 
of  Christ  at  large.  As  a  minister  he  stands  in  the  same 
relation  to  the  church  Avhich  an  adult  in  a  private  point 
of  view  sustains  who  has  just  been  baptized.  The  one 
becomes  the  minister  of  a  particular  church,  solely  by 
the  fact,  that  a  congregation  is  committed  to  his  charge 
in  conformity  to  proper  ecclesiastical  authority ;  and  the 
other  becomes  a  member  of  a  particular  church  solely  by 
his  agreeing  with  some  particular  body  of  Christians  to 
worship  God  in  connection  with  them,  in  the  same  man- 
ner and  in  accordance  with  the  same  principles  ;  and  to 
unite  together  in  the  same  communion  and  under  the 
same  discipline.  In  the  Evangelic  Lutheran  church  this 
latter  act  is  made  public  by  the  solemn  rite  of  confirma- 
tion, which  is  regarded  as  a  voluntary  and  personal  rati- 
fication of  the  original  covenant  sealed  in  baptism,  and  as 


THE    CIIURCn    OF    GOD.  23 

a  peculiarly  appropriate  and  impressive  mode  of  admit- 
ting individuals  to  adult  denominational  membership. 

From  all  these  facts  it  is  obvious,  that  a  person  may 
be  a  member  of  the  church  of  God  at  large,  and  not  a 
member  of  a  particular  church ;  and  that  something  apart 
from  baptism,  and  even  from  a  general  profession  of  reli- 
gion, is  required  to  constitute  an  adult  a  member  of  a 
particular  church.  Let  us  suppose  a  case  :  A  man  offers 
himself  for  baptism,  he  is  examined,  and  if  found  defect- 
ive in  Christian  knowledge,  receives  instruction;  he  then 
professes  his  faith  and  promises  obedience,  and  tliis  con- 
stitutes him  a  member  of  God's  church  at  large.  He 
next  voluntarily  receives  baptism,  as  a  seal  on  the  part  of 
God,  of  his  covenant  with  the  man,  and  of  his  acceptance 
of  him  into  his  family ;  and  also  as  a  seal  on  his  own 
part  of  his  own  covenant  with  God.  Here  then  Ave  have 
him  a  member  of  the  church  of  God  in  general,  and  it 
remains  for  him  to  become  a  member  of  a  particular 
church  in  the  manner  specified  above.  Precisely  similar 
to  the  case  just  supposed,  was  that  of  the  Ethiopian 
eunuch.  He  made  a  profession  of  religion,  and  was 
accordingly  baptized  by  Philip.  By  his  profession  he 
became  a  member  of  the  church  catholic  ;  by  his  baptism 
his  membership  was  formally  recognized,  but  he  was  not 
a  member  of  any  specific  church,  for  he  could  not  have 
acted  in  the  ecclesiastical  measures  of  any  specific  church, 
nor  voted  in  the  regulations  of  worship,  communion  or 
discipline. 

These  observations  were  thought  necessary  in  order  to 
explain  the  views  we  entertain  on  this  subject  in  general. 
If  they  be  well  founded,  then  it  is  not  a  strictly  appro- 
priate application  of  language,  to  call  baptism  an  initia- 


24  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

tory^  ordinance,  or  to  exhibit  it  as  a  means  of  introduc- 
tion into  the  church  of  God.  It  is,  accurately  speaking, 
no  such  ordinance  or  means ;  but  it  is  a  hohj  sacra- 
ment, an  appointed  means  of  grace; — a  solemn  sign 
and  seal  of  the  glorious  covenant  of  God  with  his  peo- 
ple,— and  an  impressive  recognition  of  membership  in 
the  church  general. 

■  If  the  word  initiatory  be  used  in  the  popular  sense  of  introducittg 
or  entering,  it  is  erroneous  to  prefix  it  to  baptism ;  but  if  only  to 
designate  a  formal  setting  forth  and  acknowledgment  of  a  right  to 
privileges  previously  possessed,  it  may  not  be  particularly  objection- 
able. 


ARGUMENTS,  &c. 


CHAPTER  III. 

Having  dwelt  at  some  length  on  the  nature  of  baptism 
and  the  church  of  God  m  general,  we  shall,  after  one 
more  preliminary  observation,  proceed  to  the  argument. 
In  advocating  the  baptism  of  young  children  Ave  by  no 
means  wish  to  be  understood  to  intimate  that  adults  have 
no  right  to  this  ordinance ;  on  the  contrary,  they  are 
solemnly  bound,  if  unbaptized,  to  lay  claim  to  it  without 
delay,  and  if  they  afford  evidence  of  repentance  and  faith 
in  Christ,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  minister  of  the  gospel  to 
whom  they  apply,  to  administer  it  to  them. 

Thus  prepared  for  investigation,  our  first  object  shall 
be  to  prove  the  necessity  of  infant  baptism.  And 
we  shall  endeavor  to  arrange  the  arguments  in  that  order 
which  commends  itself  to  our  mind  as  the  most  natural 
and  easy  of  apprehension. 

first  argument. 
Christ  has  commanded  infant  baptism.     The  com- 
mand is  recorded  Matt,  xxviii.  19 — 20,  "  Go  ye  therefore 
and  disciple  or  make  disciples  of  all  nations,  baptizing 
them  in  the  name,"  &c. 
3 


26  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

Here  we  have  a  universal  precept  embracing  "  all 
nations,"  or  according  to  Mark,  "  every  creature  ;"  and 
in  our  judgment  children  are  included  in  this  precept  as 
well  as  adults.  If  they  are  not  it  belongs  to  anti-pedo- 
baptists  to  prove  it,  either  by  adducing  other  texts  of 
Scripture  of  a  contrary  import,  or  by  showing  that  the  cir- 
cumstances under  which  the  command  was  given,  neces- 
sarily restrict  its  meaning.  But  they  do  not  pretend  to 
find  a  single  passage  in  all  the  sacred  writings,  debar- 
ring infants  from  the  privilege  of  baptism,  and  so  far  from 
restricting  the  application  of  the  precept,  all  the  circum- 
stances of  the  case  conspire  not  only  to  prove  its  univer- 
sality, but  to  afford  the  clearest  additional  evidence  that 
neither  the  apostles  nor  the  Jews  could  possibly  have 
understood  the  injunction  in  any  other  sense  than  as  com- 
prehending infants. 

They  must  have  thus  interpreted  it,  because — 

1 .  It  had  been  a  general  and  long  continued  practice 
among  the  Jews  to  baptize  as  well  as  circumcise  the 
children  of  proselytes  when  they  received  them  as  mem- 
bers of  the  church,  so  that  in  fact  infant  baptism  prevailed 
prior  to  its  divine  institution  by  Christ.  If  therefore  our 
Lord  had  designed  that  infants  should  be  excluded,  it 
would  have  been  indispensably  necessary,  expressly  and 
positively  to  forbid  iheir  baptism,  but  as  he  did  not  add 
a  prohibitory  clause,  it  follows  that  his  command  embraced 
them,  and  all  who  heard  it  must  most  indisputably  have 
so  understood  it. 

That  baptism  prevailed  among  the  Jews  prior  to  and 
at  the  time  of  Christ's  incarnation,  is  a  historical  fact 
susceptible  of  abundant  proof.  They  practised  it  on 
various  occasions,  but  it  is  sufficient  for  our  purpose  to 


FIRST   ARGUMENT.  27 

show  that  they  were  in  the  habit  of  baptizing  all  prose- 
lytes to  their  faith,  whether  adults  or  children. 

The  testimony  of  Maimonides,'  the  great  interpreter  of 
the  Jewish  law,  is  very  satisfactory  on  this  subject. 
"Israel,"  he  states,  "was  admitted  into  covenant  by  three 
things,  namely,  by  circumcision,  baptism  and  sacrifice. 
Baptism  Avas  in  the  wilderness,  before  the  giving  of  the 
law."  Again,  "  Abundance  of  proselytes  Avere  made  in 
tlie  days  of  David  and  Solomon  before  private  men ;  and 
the  great  Sanhedrim  was  full  of  care  about  this  business  ; 
for  they  would  not  cast  them  out  of  the  church,  because 
they  were  baptized."  Maimonides.  Issure  Biah,  c.  13. 
"  Once  more,  whensoever  any  heathen  *  *  *  will  take 
the  yoke  of  the  law  upon  him,  circumcision,  baptism 
and  a  voluntary  oblation  are  required.  *  *  *  *  That 
was  a  common  axiom,  no  man  is  a  proselyte  until  he  be 
circumcised  and  baptized.     Jevamoth  fol.  46. 

Dr.  Gill  has  indeed  ventured  the  assertion  that  no  men- 
tion is  made  in  the  earlier  writings  of  the  Jews  of 
admitting  proselytes  by  baptism.  But  the  evidence  of 
this  fact  does  not  rest  solely  on  the  testimony  of  Jewish 
records ;  it  was  known  even  to  the  heathen.  "  Why," 
says  Epictetus  in  reproving  those  who  professed  to  be 
philosophers  while  they  did  not  live  as  such,  "  Avhy  do 
you  call  yourself  a  Stoic  ?  Why  do  you  deceive  the  mul- 
titude ?  Why  do  you  pretend  to  be  a  Greek  when  you 
are  a  Jew,  a  Syrian,  an  Egyptian  ?  And  when  we  see 
any  one  wavering  we  are  wont  to  say,  this  is  not  a  Jeiv, 
but  acts  one.  But  when  lie  assumes  the  seitiments  of 
one  who  hath  been  baptized  and  circumcised,  then  he 
both  really  is,  and  is  called  a  Jew.     Thus  Ave,  falsifying 

'Maimonides  lived  in  the  12th  century. 


28  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

our  profession,  are  Jews  in  name,  but  in  reality  some- 
thing else."' 

As  our  Baptist  brethren  have  labored  hard  to  prove, 
that  the  baptism  of  proselytes  was  not  practised  anterior 
to  the  Christian  era,  we  shall  add  the  testimony  of  other 
distinguished  writers : 

"  The  Jews  require  three  things  to  a  complete  prose- 
lyte ;  baptism,  circumcision  and  sacrifice ;  but  for  wo- 
men only  baptism  and  sacrifice." — Cahnefs  Dictionary, 
art.  Pros. 

"  Whenever  gentiles  were  proselyted  to  the  Jewish 
religion,  they  were  initiated  by  circumcision,  the  offering 
of  a  sacrifice,  and  baptism.  They  were  all  baptized, 
males  and  females,  adults  and  infants.  This  was  their 
constant  practice,  from  the  time  of  Moses  to  that  of  our 
Saviour,  and  from  that  period  to  the  present  day."— 
Dr.  Wall. 

"  The  custom  of  the  Jews,  in  all  ages,  has  been  to 
receive  their  heathen  proselytes  by  baptism,  as  well  as 
by  sacrifice  and  circumcision." — Stackhouse. 

"  When  a  gentile  becomes  a  proselyte  of  righteous- 
ness, three  ceremonies  were  used,  viz.,  circumcision, 
baptism  and  sacrifice." — Witsius. 

"  The  apostles  knew  well,  that  the  Jews  not  only  cir- 
cumcised the  children  of  proselytes,  but  also  baptized 
them.  The  children  and  even  infants  of  proselytes 
were  baptized  among  the  Jews.  They  were  in  conse- 
quence, reputed  clean,  and  partakers  of  the  blessings  of 
the  covenant." — Dr.  A.  Clarke. 

'Epictetus  lived  according  to  Dr.  Lardner  A.  D.  109,  and  accord- 
ing to  Le  Clerc  A.  D.  104.  He  was  about  sixty  years  old  when  he 
penned  the  quotation,  and  obtained  his  information  probably  thirty 
or  forty  years  earlier,  which  brings  it  up  to  the  apostles. 


FIRST   ARGUMENT.  29 

But  the  testimonies  are  too  numerous  to  be  quoted ; 
we  refer  those  who  wish  for  further  proof,  to  Lightfoot's 
Hor.  Heb.  on  Matt.  3  and  John  3 ;  Gale's  Reflections  on 
Wall's  History;  Michaelis'  Dogm.  §  180;  lahn's  Archae- 
ology ;  Witstein  on  Matt.  iii.  8 ;  Gill's  Body  of  Divini- 
ty; R.  Robinson's  History  of  Baptism,  and  other  works. 
Dr.  Woods'  reflections  on  this  question,  deserve  a 
place  here.  In  regard  to  this  subject,  says  he,  let  the 
following  things  be  well  considered  : 

"  First.  The  rabbins  unanimously  assert  that  the  bap- 
tism of  proselytes  had  been  practised  by  the  Jews  in  all 
ages,  from  Moses  down  to  the  time  when  they  wrote. 
Now  tliese  writers  must  have  been  sensible  that  their 
contemporaries,  both  Jews  and  Christians,  knew  whether 
such  a  practice  had  been  prevalent  or  not.  And  had  it 
been  known  that  no  such  practice  had  existed ;  would  not 
some  Jews  have  been  found,  bold  enough  to  contradict 
such  a  groundless  assertion  of  the  rabbins  ?  At  least, 
would  there  not  have  been  some  Christians,  fired  with 
the  love  of  truth,  and  jealous  for  the  honor  of  a  sacred 
rite  first  instituted  by  Christ,  who  would  have  exposed 
to  shame  those  who  falsely  asserted  that  a  similar  rite 
had  existed  for  more  than  a  thousand  years  ?  But  nei- 
ther of  these  things  was  done. 

"Second.  Had  not  the  Jews  been  accustomed  to 
baptize  proselytes  previously  to  the  Christian  era ;  it  is 
extremely  improbable  that  they  would  have  adopted  the 
practice  afterwards.  For  their  contempt  and  hatred  of 
Christianity  exceeded  all  bounds,  and  must  have  kept 
them  at  the  greatest  possible  distance  from  copying  a  rite 
peculiar  to  Christians. 

"  Third.     It  seems  to  have  been  perfectly  consistent 
and  j)roper  for  the  Jews   to   baptize   proselytes.     For 


30  INFANT    BAPTISM- 

their  divine  ritual  enjoined  various  purifications  by  wash- 
ing or  baptism.  And  as  they  considered  all  gentiles  to 
be  unclean,  how  could  they  do  otherwise  than  under- 
stand the  divine  law  to  require,  that  when  any  of  them 
were  proselyted  to  the  Jewish  rehgion,  they  should  re- 
ceive the  same  sign  of  purification,  as  was,  in  so  many 
cases,  applied  to  themselves?" 

Here  then  we  have  proof  positive,  that  in  all  cases  of 
adult  proselytes  to  the  JoAvish  church,  baptism  Avas 
inseparably  joined  to  circumcision.  That  such  was  also 
the  fact  in  reference  to  infants,  is  no  less  certain.  For 
the  same  distinguished  and  learned  Jewish  writer,  Mai- 
monides,  states  :  "  They  baptized  also  young  children. 
They  baptize  a  little  proselyte  according  to  the  judgment 
of  the  Sanhedrim ;  tlaat  is,  as  the  gloss  renders  it,  if  he 
be  deprived  of  his  father,  and  his  mother  brings  him  to 
be  made  a  proselyte,  they  baptize  him  (because  none 
becomes  a  proselyte  without  circumcision  and  baptism) 
according  to  the  judgment,  or  rite,  of  the  Sanhedrim ; 
that  is,  that  three  men  be  present  at  the  baptism,  who  are 
now  instead  of  a  father  to  him.  And  the  Gemara,  a  little 
after  says,  if  with  a  proselyte,  his  sons  and  his  daughters 
are  made  proselytes  also,  that  which  is  done  by  their 
father,  redounds  to  their  good. 

"  If  a  heathen  Avoman  is  made  a  proselytess  while  in 
gravidation,  the  child  needs  not  baptism ;  for  the  baptism 
of  his  mother,  serves  him  for  baptism.  Otherwise  he 
were  to  be  baptized,  Jevam.  fol.  78. 

"  If  an  Israelite  find  a  gentile  child,  or  a  gentile 
infant,  and  baptize  him,  *  *  *  behold  he  is  a  proselyte." 
Maim,  in  Avidim.  c.  8. 

It  is  accordingly  a  fact  well  attested,  that  when  pro- 
selytes to  Judaism  were  gained  from  the   surrounding 


FIRST    ARGUMENT.  31 

nations,  all  the  children  of  a  family  were  invariably 
regarded  as  members  in  the  chnrch  as  well  as  the  parents, 
and  on  the  faith  of  their  parents,  all  the  males  whether 
children  or  adnlts  Avere  circnmcised,  and  in  connection 
with  circnmcision,  the  whole  family,  male  and  female, 
were  baptized,  and  incorporated  in  the  commnnity  of 
God's  people.  Nearly  all  the  most  competent  judges  in 
the  Jewish  and  Christian  church,  from  Selden  and  Light- 
foot  down  to  Dr.  Ad.  Clarke  regard  the  testimony  to  this 
historical  fact  as  abundant  and  conclusive.  Even  Mr. 
Booth,  a  distinguished  Baptist  writer,  admits  that,  "  the 
children  of  proselytes  ivere  baptized  along  luith  their 
parents.^^  Moreover,  it  seems  plain  that  the  Jews 
must  have  been  accustomed  to  the  rite  of  baptism  and 
expected  the  Messiah,  when  he  came,  to  practise  it,  or 
how  can  we  account  for  their  propounding  to  John  this 
question:  "Why  baptizest  thou,  then,  if  thou  be  not  the 
Christ?" 

It  is  further  obvious  that  Christ's  language  must  have 
been  thus  understood  by  the  apostles  because — 

3.  They  knew  that  infants  had  from  time  immemorial 
been  regarded  as  members  in  the  church  of  God.  When 
Jehovah  made  his  covenant  with  Abraham,  he  expressly 
included  them  in  that  covenant,  and  ordained  circumcis- 
ion as  the  sign  and  seal  of  it.^  Even  Baptists  do  not 
and  indeed  cannot  deny  this  fact.  For  nearly  two  thou- 
sand years  therefore,  the  practice  of  acknowledging  chil- 
dren as  members  of  God's  visible  church,  in  the  ordi- 
nance of  circumcision,  had  existed,  and  still  existed  at 
the  very  time  the  command  in  question  was  issued. 
Hence  the  apostles  had  no  idea  of  a  church  from  which 
children  were  excluded.  They  knew  that  the  covenant 
'Gen.  xvii.  10—14. 


32  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

with  Abraham  continued  in  force  and  was  to  be  "  an 
everlasting  covenant,""  that  the  church  of  God  under  the 
new  dispensation  was  not  a  different  church  from  that 
under  the  old,  but  essentially  the  same,  and  hence  they 
could  not  do  otherwise  than  believe,  that  as  children 
were  considered  members  of  the  church  by  virtue  of  the 
covenant  with  Abraham,  therefore, — that  covenant  having 
never  been  abrogated, — they  must  continue  to  be  so  con- 
sidered;  and  accordingly,  "when  the  Saviour  uttered 
the  universal,  unlimited  and  unqualified  command  :  "Go 
ye  and  make  disciples  of  all  nations,"  they  could  not  in 
the  nature  of  things  have  understood  that  command  "  to 
convey  a  new  and  unheard  of  restriction,  which  was 
contrary  to  all  their  prepossessions,  feelings  and  opinions, 
and  of  which  (restriction)  they  could  not  know  any  thing, 
unless  it  had  been  explicitly  communicated  to  them." 
Add  to  this  statement,  the  fact  already  mentioned,  that 
baptism  had  been  previously  connected  with  circumcis- 
ion, and  was  applied  to  infants,  and  it  appears  to  us  it 
must  have  been  utterly  impossible  to  understand  these 
words  of  Christ  in  any  other  sense  than  as  comprehend- 
ing children. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

OBECTIONS    TO    THIS    ARGUMENT. 

First  Objection. — The  command  of  Christ  does  not 
expressly  require  the  baptism  of  infants. 

Answer.  It  has  already  been  abundantly  proven  that 
an  express  requirement  was,  under  the  circumstances  of 
the  case,  altogether  unnecessary,  and  would  have  been 
superfluous.  The  apostles  needed  no  such  requirement, 
and  could  not  fail  to  understand  what  was  their  duty  in 
reference  to  children,  without  it. 

Moreover,  if  no  obligation  can  be  imposed  without  an 
express  command,  why  do  our  opponents  attend  public 
worship,  keep  the  first  instead  of  the  seventh  day  holy 
unto  the  Lord,  and  administer  the  holy  supper  to  fe- 
males ? — AVhy  do  they  pray  with  their  children  and  fami- 
lies, or  teach  them  to  read  ? — Why  do  rulers  provide  the 
means  of  defending  the  country  they  govern,  or  punish 
a  twentieth  part  of  those  crimes,  which,  if  left  unpun- 
islied,  would  ruin  the  country  1  They  cannot  find  in  all 
the  Scriptures  of  God,  one  solitary  express  injunction 
demanding  these  duties.  The  extent  to  which  this  prin- 
ciple would  lead,  if  fairly  pursued,  would  astonish  even 
those  who  urge  it. 

Dr.  Lightfoot  has  spoken  well  on  this  point :  "  To  the 
objection.  It  is  not  commanded  to  baptize  infants,  there- 
fore they  are  not  to  be  baptized  ; — I  answer :  It  is  not 
forbidden  to  baptize  infants,  therefore  they  are  to  be  bap- 
tized.     And  the  reason  is  plain  :  for  when  pedo-bajJtism 


34  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

in  the  Jewish  church  was  so  known,  usual,  and  frequent 
in  the  admission  of  proselytes,  that  nothing  almost  was 
more  known,  usual  and  frequent :  there  was  no  need  to 
strengthen  it  with  any  precept,  when  baptism  was  now 
passed  into  an  evangelical  sacrament.  For  Christ  took 
baptism  into  his  hands  and  into  evangelical  use,  as  he 
found  it :  this  only  added,  that  he  might  promote  it  to  a 
worthier  end  and  a  larger  use.  The  Avhole  nation  knew 
well  enough  that  little  children  used  to  be  baptized ; 
there  was  no  need  of  a  precept  for  that,  which  had  ever 
by  common  use  prevailed.  *  *  *  On  the  other  hand, 
therefore,  there  was  need  of  a  plain  and  open  prohibi- 
tion that  infants  and  little  children  should  not  be  bap- 
tized, if  our  Lord  would  not  have  had  them  baptized. 
For  since  it  was  most  common  in  all  preceding  ages,  that 
little  children  shoidd  be  baptized;  if  Christ  had  been 
minded  to  have  that  custom  abolished,  he  would  have 
openly  forbidden  it.  Therefore  his  silence  and  the 
silence  of  the  Scripture  in  this  matter,  confirms  pedo- 
baptism  and  continues  it  to  all  ages. 


Second  Objection. — The  very  command  that  pre- 
scribes the  baptism  of  all  nations,  also  requires  their  in- 
struction :  "  teaching  them,"  &c. ;  but  young  children  can- 
not be  taught,  and  for  this  reason  ought  not  to  be  baptized. 
Moreover,  adds  the  objector,  the  exercise  of  "/aj7/i"  is 
connected  with  baptism,  but  children  cannot  believe, 
therefore  it  is  preposterous  to  baptize  them. 

Answer. — If  the  principle  involved  in  this  objection 
were  universally  adopted,  it  would  prove  the  greatest 
absurdities.  For  example,  the  apostle  declares,  "  that 
if  any  would  not  work,  neither  should  he  eat."^     Here 

H  Thess.  iii.  10. 


OBJECTIONS.  35 

working  for  our  bread  is  connected  with  eating ;  but 
children  cannot  work,  therfefore  they  have  no  right  to 
eat ; — neither  aged  and  infirm  people,  nor  others  confined 
to  bed  by  sickness  labor  for  subsistence,  therefore  they 
also  ought  not  to  be  permitted  to  eat.  Again,  the  exer- 
cise of  faith  is  equally  connected  with  salvation :  "  He 
that  believeth  and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved ;  but  he  that 
believeth  not  shall  be  damned  ;"^  but  children  and  also 
idiots  and  insane  persons  cannot  exercise  faith,  therefore 
they  cannot  be  saved,  but  must  all  without  a  single  excep- 
tion be  "  damned.''^  Further,  when  children  were  cir- 
cumcised under  the  Mosaic  dispensation,  they  were 
thereby  in  a  formal  manner  obligated  to  observe  the 
whole  law,  moral,  ceremonial  and  civil ;  for,  "  every 
man,"  says  the  apostle,  "  that  is  circumcised  is  a  debtor 
to  the  whole  law  ;"*  but  as  children  it  was  impossible  to 
fulfil  this  obligation,  therefore  it  was  wrong  to  circumcise 
tliem.  Thus,  the  principle  assumed  in  the  foregoing  objec- 
tion, when  carried  out,  not  only  leads  to  the  most  palpable 
absurdities,  but  absolutely  arrays  its  advocates  in  open 
hostility  to  God's  express  command ! 

But  a  syllogistic  statement  of  the  arginnent  contained 
in  the  objection,  will  present  its  utter  fallacy  in  a  still 
more  glaring  light. — "i/e  that  believeth  and  is  bap- 
tized shall  be  saved  f^  thus  far  our  Baptist  brethren  quote. 
We  continue  the  quotation:  ^^  But  he  that  believeth 
not  shall  be  damned."     Now  for  the  syllogism. 

Their  argument  is  this : 

1 .  Faith  is  required  in  order  to  baptism : 

2.  But  infants  cannot  exercise  faith  : 

3.  Therefore,  infants  cannot  be  baptized. 

'Mark  r^'i.  16.  ^Gal.  v.  3. 


36  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

We  turn  this  argument  thus : 

1 .  Faith  is  required  in  order  to  salvation : 

2.  But  infants  cannot  exercise  faith  : 

3.  Therefore,  infants  cannot  be  saved. 

Thus,  the  objection  begins  by  shutting  out  our  children 
from  tlie  church  of  God;  and  ends  with  shutting  all  of 
them  who  die  in  infancy  in  the  prison  of  hell  forever  !^ 

Our  readers  will  observe  that  these  several  refutations 
of  the  objection  are  legitimately  drawn  from  our  Baptist 
brethren's  own  principles,  in  bringing  them  to  bear 
against  themselves  ;  and  may  well  be  said  to  rank  among 
the  argumenta  ad  hominem,  which  constitute  the  strong- 
est sort  of  argument.  Thus,  in  attempting  to  wound  us, 
they  absolutely  destroy  themselves,  and  should  they  pre- 
vail by  means  of  this  weapon,  the  victory  must  be  fatal 
to  their  own  cause ;  for  in  the  moment  that  it  is  achieved, 
they  meet  their  OAvn  death  on  the  point  of  their  own 
sword. 

Now  We  candidly  appeal  to  every  unprejudiced  mind, 
whether  a  position  that  necessarily  conducts  to  results  so 

1  We  aclmowledge  ourselves  indebted  to  the  late  distinguished  Dr. 
Mason  of  New  York,  for  this  mode  of  stating  the  subject,  though 
we  have  not  chosen  to  adhere  to  his  phraseology.  In  a  note  of 
reference  to  the  latter  syllogism,  he  remarks :  "  We  do  not  say  that 
the  opposers  of  infant  baptism  hold  such  an  opinion.  Their  most 
distinguished  writers  disown  and  repel  it.  But  we  say,  that  it  neces- 
sarily results  from  their  requiring  faith,  in  all  cases,  as  a  qualification 
for  baptism.  They  do  not  follow  out  their  own  position.  They 
stop  short  at  the  point  which  suits  their  system.  We  take  it  up 
where  they  leave  it,  and  conduct  it  to  its  direct  and  inevitable  con- 
clusion. Therefore,  though  we  do  not  charge  the  men  with  main- 
tainmg  that  those  who  die  in  infancy,  perish ;  yet  we  charge  this 
consequence  upon  their  argument :  for  it  certainly  proves  this  or  it 
proves  nothing  at  all." 


OBJECTIONS.  37 

grossly  inconsistent  with  the  clearest  dictates  of  common 
sense  and  sound  religion,  can  by  any  possibility  be 
founded  in  truth  ? — and  yet  such  is  the  nature  of  the 
objection  now  under  consideration. 

How  then  do  we  understand  the  injunction  to  teach,  to 
believe,  to  repent,  &c.,  when  in  juxtaposition  Avith  bap- 
tism ? — There  is  not  the  slightest  difficulty  in  the  subject, 
when  viewed  aside  from  preconceived  opinion.  All 
those  requisitions  manifestly  refer  to  adult  persons,  and 
when  called  upon  to  baptize  such,  we  always  consider  it 
a  duty  to  teach  them,  and  to  require  them  to  repent  and 
believe;  our  language  to  them  is:  "If  thou  believest  with 
all  thine  heart,  thou  mayest  be  baptized.'"  But  this 
evidently  has  nothing  to  do  with  infant  baptism.  Infants 
are  incapable  of  being  taught,  of  believing  &c.  and  of 
course,  these  duties  cannot  be  consistently  demanded  from 
them  preparatory  to  their  baptism,  any  more  than  the 
duty  to  work,  in  order  to  entide  them  to  food.  It  mav 
be  laid  down  as  a  rule,  that  absolute  inability  to  perform 
a  duty  exonerates  us  from  the  obligation  to  perform  it. 
Thus  a  blind  man  is  not  bound  to  read  the  gospel,  nor  a 
deaf  man  to  hear  it  preached,  nor  an  insane  man  to 
repent,  nor  a  sick  man  to  labor,  unless  the  absolute  inabi- 
lity in  the  several  cases  can  be  remedied.  God  does  not 
require  impossibilities. — On  the  same  principle,  infants 
cannot  be  required  to  believe,  for  the  purpose  of  giving 
them  a  right  to  baptism  or  to  salvation.  "It  is  a  dictate 
of  common  sense,  which  all  men  observe  (and  the  oppo- 
nents of  pedo-baptism  also,  in  all  cases  except  this,)  that 
any  passage  of  Scripture,  requiring  a  qualification  or 
action  of  which  children  are  incapable,  is  intended  to  be 
applied  only  to  adults  ;"  and  consequently  their  inability 

'Acts  viii.  37. 
4 


38  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

to  believe,  is  no  more  a  barrier  to  their  baptism  than  to 
their  future  salvation ;  if  it  were,  it  must  also  have  formed 
an  insurmountable  obstacle  to  their  circumcision. 

It  is  however  urged  again  and  again,  that  as  baptism  is 
a  "  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith'"  and  as  infants  are 
incapable  of  acting  either  intelligently  or  voluntarily  in 
any  respect  whatever,  it  is  not  only  useless  but  down- 
right folly  to  baptize  them. — The  whole  of  this  language 
applies  with  equal  force  to  circumcision.  It  is  admitted 
by  all  that  infants  of  eight  days  old  were  by  divine  ap- 
pointment circumcised,  and  thus  declared  members  of 
the  church  of  God ;  it  must  also  be  conceded,  because 
expressly  declared  by  the  apostle,  that  circumcision  as 
well  as  baptism  Avas,  "  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of 
faith. "^  Here  then,  we  would  ask,  were  children  of 
eight  days  old  more  capable  of  exercising  faith  when  they 
were  circumcised,  than  they  are  now  when  tliey  are  bap- 
tized? Surely  this  objection  is  as  valid  in  the  one  case 
as  in  the  other,  and  hence  every  charge  oi  folly,  absurd- 
ity, &c.,  brought  against  infant  baptism  on  the  score  of 
incapacity  to  exercise  faith,  lies  with  equal  force  against 
infant  circumcision.  Do  our  adversaries  then  say,  "  the 
baptism  of  infants    who  know   nothing  of  believing  in 

'As  this  quotation  will  be  frequently  found  in  this  volume,  it  may 
be  well  to  define  its  meaning.  A  seal  is  an  instrument  used  to  make 
an  impression  on  wax,  annexed  to  some  writing,  containing  the  en- 
gagement of  him  whose  seal  it  is.  The  design  of  the  seal  is  to  make 
known  that  the  writing  is  his  writing,  or  the  act  his  act  and  sets  forth 
his  pleasure.  Thus  bonds,  deeds,  &c.  are  sealed  to  authenticate  the 
instrument  itself  and  furnish  obligatory  proof  of  the  engagements 
of  the  sealer.  We  therefore  understand  the  quotation  to  imply, 
that  baptism  is  a  solemn  exliibition  and  evidence  of  the  fundamental 
truth,  that  we  become  righteous  in  the  sight  of  God,  or  are  justified, 
by  faith  in  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

^Rom.  IV.  11. 


OBJECTIONS.  39 

Christ,  is  a  nullity  and  mockery;  an  absurd  and  foolish 
ceremony:"  then  it  follows,  that  the  circumcision  of  in- 
fants who  knew  nothing  of  that  righteousness  of  faith 
which  it  sealed,  was  also  a  nullity  and  mockery,  was  also 
an  absurd  and  foolish  ceremony;  and  the  divine  command 
which  enjoined  it,  (with  reverence  be  it  spoken)  a  foolish 
and  an  absurd  commandment! 

Are  Baptists  then,  willing  to  say,  that  the  application 
of  a  'seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith'  to  unconscious 
infants,  of  eight  days  old,  was  so  wickedly  preposterous? 
"Are  they  prepared  thus  to  'charge  God  foolishly?'— 
Yet  they  must  do  it,  if  they  would  be  consistent.  They 
cannot  escape  from  the  shocking  alternative.  Every 
harsh  and  contemptuous  epithet  which  they  apply  to  in- 
fant baptism,  must,  if  they  would  adhere  to  the  principles 
which  they  lay  down,  be  applied  to  infant  circumcision 
But  that  which  unavoidably  leads  to  such  a  consequence 
cannot  be  warranted  by  the  word  of  God.''^ 

The  fallacy  of  the  preceding  objection  is  exposed  by 
Edwards  in  a  very  lucid  manner.  '^  That  particular  rule, 
against  which  this  argument  oflends,  is  this:  ^ Non  debet 
plus  esse  in  conclusione  quam  erat  in  premissis.  Ratio 
manifesta  est,  quia,  conclusio  educenda  est  ex  pre- 
missis.^  That  is,  'Thei-e  should  not  be  more  in  the 
conclusion  than  was  in  the  premises.  The  reason  is 
plain,  because  the  conclusion  is  to  be  drawn  from  the 
premises.'  We  will  try  to  make  this  plain,  by  exam- 
ples both  of  true  and  false  reasoning. 

"1.  In  the  Baptist  way  of  reasoning.  When  the  Scrip- 
tures   say,    'Repent   and   be   baptized;'   and,    '"If  thou 
behevest   thou  mayest,'    &c.,   they  address  only   sinful 
adults;  and  then,  an  argument  formed  upon  them  should 
'See  Dr.  Miller  on  Baptism. 


40  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

reach  no  farther  than  adults  of  the  same  description.  But 
the  Baptists  form  their  fallacious  argument  on  these  pas- 
sages, by  bringing  infants  into  the  conclusion,  who,  as 
they  are  not  addressed,  are  not  at  all  concerned  in  the 
premises.  This  will  appear  plain  by  three  instances  on 
the  Baptist  plan. 

"The  Baptist  argument  runs  thus:  The  Scriptures 
require  faith  and  repentance  in  order  to  baptism;  but 
infants  have  not  faith  and  repentance ;  therefore  they  are 
not  to  be  baptized.  Now  as  the  Scriptures  require  faith 
and  repentance  only  of  adults,  we  must  place  that  word 
in  the  argument,  and  then  it  will  stand  in  this  form:  The 
Scriptures  require  faith  and  repentance  of  adults  in 
order  to  baptism ;  but  infants  cannot  have  these :  there- 
fore infants  are  not  fit  subjects  of  baptism.  In  the  same 
way,  we  may  form  the  two  following  instances,  viz.— 
The  Scriptures  require  faith  and  repentance  of  adults  in 
order  to  salvation ;  but  infants  cannot  have  these  :  there- 
fore infants  cannot  be  saved.  Again,  He  [an  adultj  who 
will  not  work,  neither  should  he  eat ;  but  an  infant  can- 
not will  to  work,  therefore  an  infant  should  not  eat.  The 
reader  may  perceive,  that  by  placing  the  word  adults  in 
one  proposition,  and  infants  in  the  other,  (wliich  makes  it 
a  sophism)  there  are  three  things  proved  in  the  same 
way,  viz.  That  infants  cannot  be  saved — that  infants 
should  not  eat — that  infants  should  not  be  baptized.  And 
so,  for  the  same  reason,  that  an  infant  cannot  be  saved, 
that  an  infant  should  not  eat;  it  will  follow,  that  an  infant 
should  not  be  baptized.  For  all  these  are  equally  true, 
and  supported  by  the  same  reasoning.  And  it  is  in  the 
same  way,  that  this  argument  proves  against  the  baptism 
of  Christ,  and  the  circumcision  of  infants.  We  will  now 
view  these  three  instances, 


OBJECTIONS.  41 

"2.  In  the  Pedobaptist  way  of  reasoning.  We  will 
place  the  same  word  in  each  proposition,  thus :  The 
Scriptures  require  faith  and  repentance  of  adults  in  order 
to  baptism ;  but  some  adults  have  no  faith,  no  repentance ; 
therefore  some  adults  are  not  to  be  baptized.  Again, 
The  Scriptures  require  faith  and  repentance  of  adults  in 
order  to  salvation ;  but  some  adults  do  not  believe  nor 
repent ;  therefore  some  adults  will  not  be  saved.  Once 
more — He  [an  adult]  who  Avill  not  work,  neither  should 
he  eat ;  but  some  adult  will  not  work ;  therefore  some 
adult  should  not  eat.  Now  by  placing  the  Avord  adult  m 
each  proposition,  without  which  it  would  be  a  sophistical 
argument,  the  reader  may  see,  that  as  infants  can  have 
no  place  in  either,  there  is  nothing  to  forbid  their  sup- 
port, their  salvation,  or  their  baptism.  They  only  prove, 
that  an  idle  adult  should  not  be  supported ;  that  an  im- 
penitent adult  will  not  be  saved ;  and,  that  he  has  no  right 
at  all  to  baptism. 

*'Once  more — As  I  have  nothing  in  view  so  much  as 
tnith,  I  have  a  great  desire  to  make  this  matter  plain  to 
tlie  meanest  capacity.  For  if  I  am  clearly  understood  in 
this  part,  my  end,  on  the  present  argument,  is  attained ; 
and  what  I  have  before  advanced  upon  it,  will  be  in  a 
gi-eat  measure,  useless.  The  reader,  therefore,  is  de- 
sired to  observe,  that  the  design  of  this  argument  is  to 
conclude  against  the  baptism  of  infants.  Then,  as  infants 
are  to  be  in  the  conclusion,  they  must  also  be  in  the  pre- 
mises ;  for  the  rule  says,  '  there  should  not  be  more  in 
the  conclusion  than  ^vas  in  the  premises ;  because  the 
conclusion  is  to  be  drawn  from  the  premises.' 

"  Now  to  make  the  argument  of  the  Baptists  consist- 
ent with  itself,  we  must  place  infants  in  the  premises  as 

well  as  in  the  conclusion ;  and  then  the  argument  will 
4* 


42  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

Stand  thus :  The  Scriptures  require  faith  and  repentance 
of  infants  in  order  to  baptism ;  but  infants  have  not  faith, 
&c. ;  therefore  infants  are  not  to  be  baptized.  The  reader 
may  discern  an  agreement,  in  the  parts  of  the  argument, 
with  each  other ;  it  has  infants  in  each  part,  as  well  in 
the  premises  as  in  the  conclusion.  But  then  the  fallacy 
of  it  is  more  strikingly  evident  than  before :  for  the  error, 
which  before  crept  into  the  middle,  does  here  stand  in 
front ;  it  is  in  this  proposition,  the  Scriptures  require 
faith  and  repentance  of  infants  in  order  to  baptism,  which 
is  not  true ;  for  infants  are  never  required  to  repent  or 
believe,  in  order  either  to  baptism  or  salvation.  Whereas 
before,  when  it  was  said  the  Scriptures  require  faith  and 
repentance  of  adults  in  order  to  baptism ;  but  infants 
have  not  faith,  &c.,  the  error  consisted  in  putting  in  the 
word  '  infants,'  who  have  no  concern  at  all  in  the  require- 
ment. 

"  By  placing  one  thing  in  the  premises,  and  another  in 
the  conclusion,  which  is  done  by  the  Baptists,  in  this 
argument,  we  may  be  able  to  evince  any  absurdity,  how- 
ever glaring.  This  being  the  manner  of  the  Baptist  argu- 
ment, notliing  more  is  necessary  to  take  off  its  force 
against  infants,  but  to  make  the  premises  and  conclusion 
to  correspond  with  each  other.  That  is,  while  it  con- 
tinues to  be  a  sophism,  it  proves  against  infants ;  but  it 
ceases  to  prove  against  them,  as  soon  as  it  is  made  a  good 
argument,  e.  g.  Faith  and  repentance  are  required  of 
adults  in  order  to  baptism ;  but  infants  have  not  these : 
therefore  infants  are  not  to  be  baptized.  This  is  no-' 
thing  more  than  a  pure  sophism,  and,  as  such,  it  concludes 
against  infants;  but  all  its  force  against  infants  is  set 
aside  by  making  it  good,  thus  :  Faith  and  repentance  are 
required  in  adults  in  order  to  baptism,  but  some  adults 


OBJECTIONS.  43 

have  not  faith  and  repentance ;  therefore  some  adults  are 
not  to  be  baptized.  The  reader  may  see,  that  now  it  is 
a  fair  argument,  all  its  force  against  infants  is  gone. 

"  Having  said  thus  much  on  the  fallacy  of  this  argu- 
ment, I  shall  only  add  one  specimen  of  its  mode  of  opera- 
tion; and  that  is  a  specimen,  in  which  it  will  conclude 
two  contrary  ways,  on  one  place  of  Scripture,  Rom.  ii.  25. 
'  For  circumcision  verily  proiiteth,  if  thou  keep  the  law  ; 
but  if  thou  be  a  breaker  of  the  law,  thy  circumcision  is 
made  uncircumcision.' 

"Now  the  Baptist  argument,  on  the  first  member  of 
this  text,  will  operate  thus:  Circumcision  verily  profit- 
eth,  if  thou  keep  the  law ;  but  infants  could  not  keep  the 
law ;  therefore  their  circumcision  must  be  unprofitable, 
that  is,  as  no  circumcision,  a  mere  nullity ;  and  this  reflects 
on  the  wisdom  of  God.  But  if  we  form  the  same  argu- 
ment on  the  other  member,  it  will  be  no  nullity  either, 
for  thus  it  will  run :  If  thou  be  a  breaker  of  the  law,  thy 
cii'cumcision  is  made  uncircumcision ;  but  infants  could 
not  break  the  law ;  therefore  their  circumcision  could  not 
be  made  uncircumcision,  i.  e.  a  nullity.  Such  is  this 
Baptist  argument,  that  it  will  prove  infant  circumcision 
to  be  something  or  nothing,  according  to  that  part  of  the 
text  on  which  it  is  formed  ;  and  it  is  therefore  evidently 
no  more  than  a  sophism. 

"  I  have  endeavored  to  make  the  reader  see,  not  only, 
that  this  argument  is  false,  but  wherein  that  fallacy  con- 
sists. That  it  is  false,  appears  in  this,  that  in  every  in- 
stance it  opposes  a  known  truth  ;  it  opposes  the  circum- 
cision of  infants — the  baptism  of  Jesus  Christ — the  sal- 
vation of  infants — and,  their  temporal  subsistence.  The 
nature  of  the  fallacy  is  the  placing  of  adults  in  the  pre- 


44  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

mises,  and  infants  in  the  conclusion ;  which  any  person, 
who  has  the  least  knowledge  of  the  art  of  reasoning, 
must  see  instantly  to  be  repugnant  to  the  laws  of  truth." 


Third  Objection. — In  those  passages  in  which  Chris- 
tian gi-aces  are  connected  with  baptism,  the  former  always 
precede  the  latter  in  the  collocation  of  words.  Thus  it 
is  said,  "  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized,"  &c. — 
♦'Teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them,"  &c.  "Repent,  and 
be  baptized  every  one  of  you."  Now  as  repentance, 
faith,  &c.  are  placed  before  baptism  in  the  arrangement 
of  the  words  enjoining  it,  so  they  must  be  anterior  to  it 
in  practice ;  but  in  the  case  of  children  they  cannot  be 
anterior  in  practice,  therefore  it  is  reversing  the  order 
plainly  marked  out  by  Christ  to  make  children  partakers 
of  this  ordinance. 

Answer. — This  is  indeed  a  very  flimsy  objection,  but 
as  it  is  often  urged  it  must  be  noticed.  It  supposes  that 
acts  of  obedience  to  the  gospel  must  succeed  each  other 
in  tlie  precise  order  of  the  several  words  employed  in 
prescribing  those  acts ;- — in  other  language,  that  the  order 
of  words  and  the  order  of  things  are  exactly  the  same. 
A  few  plain  facts  will  abundantly  expose  the  utter  untena- 
bleness  of  this  position. 

It  will  be  admitted  by  all,  that  in  Christian  experience, 
justification  precedes  sanctification,  and  yet  in  the  order 
of  words  used  by  the  apostle,  the  latter  has  a  priority  of 
place;'  "But  ye  are  sanctified,  but  ye  are  justified  in  the 
name,"  &c.  Again,  in  every  conceivable  sense  Christ  is 
infinitely  above  the  prophets  and  apostles,  and  in  point  of 

^Cor.  vi.  11. 


OBJECTIONS.  45 

antiquity  tlie  former  were  prior  to  the  latter;  and  not- 
withstanding, in  the  arrangement  of  words,  the  first  is 
named  last  and  the  last  first :  "  And  are  built  upon  the 
foundation  of  the  apostles  and  prophets,  Jesus  Christ 
himself  being  the  chief  corner-stone."^  Ham  was  the 
youngest  of  Noah's  sons,  and  yet  he  is  always  named 
before  Japhet.  The  three  persons  of  the  Holy  Trinity 
are  equal,  but  the  name  of  the  Father  always  precedes 
that  of  the  Son,  and  the  name  of  the  Son  that  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  It  is  written,  "John  did  baptize  in  the  wilder- 
ness, and  preach  the  baptism  of  repentance;"*  but  will 
any  one  be  so  intolerably  silly  as  to  infer  from  this,  that 
he  actually  commenced  his  ministry  by  baptizing? — If 
things  take  place  agreeably  to  the  order  of  the  words 
employed  in  stating  them,  then  all  the  antediluvian  patri- 
archs uniformly  begat  their  sons  first  and  afterwards  their 
daughters ;  for  it  is  written,  they  lived  so  many  years  and 
'■'■begat  sons  and  daughters.''''^ 

'Eph.  li.  20.  ^Mark  i.  4.  ^Gen.  5. 


CHAPTER  V. 

SECOND    ARGUMENT. 

Baptism  is  the  appointed  token  of  church  member- 
ship.— In  order  to  appreciate  this  argument  in  all  the 
length  and  breadth  of  its  force,  several  important  points 
must  be  previously  established. 

1 .  That  children  ivere  entitled  to  membership  in  the 
church  of  God  under  the  old  dispensation,  and  that  cir- 
cmncision  was  the  sign  of  that  membership. 

By  the  church  of  God  here,  we  understand  the  collect- 
ive body  of  all  those  who  profess  the  true  religion,  and 
tlieir  infant  offspring.  (See  page  20.)  Such  a  church 
always  existed,  but  it  was  not  formally  organized  until 
the  days  of  Abraham,  and  nothing  is  more  plainly  taught 
than  that  at  its  organization  God  ordained  that  infants 
should  be  members  of  it,  and  receive  the  rite  setting  forth 
their  membership.  A  full  account  of  God's  covenant 
with  the  ancient  patriarch  and  his  posterity,  may  be  found 
in  the  17  ch.  of  Genesis.  In  examining  this  covenant, 
the  foUoAving  particulars  are  obvious : 

First.  It  had  respect  to  spiritual  as  well  as  temporal 
blessings,  for  according  to  the  stipulations,  Abraham  was 
to  be  "  the  father  of  many  nations  ;"  God  was  to  be  a 
"  God  to  him  and  to  his  seed  after  him,"  and  in  Abra- 
ham's "  seed  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  were  to  be 
blessed."  In  these  provisions  the  richest  spiritual  bless- 
ings that  God  could  bestow,  were  comprehended,  and  for 
this  reason  circumcision,  which  was  the  seal  of  this  cove- 


SECOND    ARGUMENT.  47 

nant,  is  expressly  declared  by  the  inspired  apostle'   to 
have  been  "a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith:' 

Second.  This  covenant  embraced  in  the  most  explicit 
terms,  the  infant  seed  of  Abraham,  and  was  never  to  be 
revoked:  "I  will  establish  my  covenant  between  me 
and  thee,  and  thy  seed  after  thee,  in  their  generations,  for 
an  everlasting  covenant,  to  be  a  God  unto  thee  and  to 
thy  seed  after  thee,"^ 

Third.     The  sign  and  seal  of  this  covenant  Avas  cir- 
cumcision,'' which  was   to  be  administered  to  children 
when  they  were  only  eight  days   old,  and  was  actually 
administered  for  nearly  nineteen  centuries  at  that  tender 
age,  in  token  of  their  church-membership  and  their  con- 
sequent title  to  the  privileges  of  the  church,  or  in  other 
words,  of  their  relation  to  God's  covenanted  family  and 
their   right   to   the    privileges  of  that   covenant.— Here 
then,  we  have  our  first  point  clearly  established ;  viz. : 
that  by  the  express  appointment  of  God  children  ivere 
constituted  members  of  the  church,  (or,  which  is  the 
same,  subjects  of  his  covenant  with  Abraham),  and  when 
eight  days  old,  received  the  ratifying  ordinance,  (or, 
which  is  the  same,  the  sign  and  seal  of  the  covenant,) 
tvhich  was  circumcision.     We  wish  our  readers  to  bear 
this  in  mind,  for  it  is  a  fact  of  the  utmost  importance,  to 
which  we  shall  often  have  occasion  to  refer  in  this  dis- 
cussion ;— a  fact  acknowledged  by  all  and  incapable  of 
refutation  by  any ;  on  which,  as  on  an  immovable  and 
everlasting  foundation,  we  are  enabled  to  rear  a  super- 
structure  which  all  the  skill  and  might  of  man  cannot 
subvert.     For  if  it  was  fit  and  necessary,  in  the  judg- 
ment of  God,  to  declare  children  to  be  members  of  his 
church  of  old,  and  bestow  upon  them  the  seal  of  mem- 
•Rom.  iv.  11.     2v.  7  ;  see  also  vs.  8,  9,  10.      ^See  vs.  10  and  12. 


48  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

bership  (which  was  "  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of 
faith'''')  before  they  were  capable  of  exercising  faith,  we 
ask  in  the  name  of  common  sense,  why  it  should  not  be 
equally  fit  and  necessary  now? 

The  next  point  to  be  established  in  order  to  develop 
our  argument  is — 

2.  That  the  church  of  God  under  the  former  and 
present  dispensation,  or  in  other  ivords,  in  the  Old  and 
Neiv  Testament  is  substantially  the  same. 

We  do  not  assume  here,  that  the  exterior  aspect  of  the 
church  is  the  same  now  that  it  was  formerly,  for  when 
Christ  died  many  divine  appointments  of  an  external 
character  received  their  accomplishment,  and  were  there- 
fore of  no  more  use.  But  the  identity  of  tlie  church 
imder  both  dispensations,  has  been  unalterably  preserved. 
We  still  have  the  same  Lord  and  Saviour  as  head  of  the 
church,  the  same  Holy  Spirit,  the  same  atoning  sacrifice, 
(which  all  the  sacrifices  of  old  prefigured  as  their  grand 
antitype),  and  are  strictly  under  the  same  covenant;  we 
are  required  to  exercise  the  same  faith  and  to  practise  the 
same  moral  duties,  all  which  are  summed  up  in  love 
supreme  to  God,  and  love  to  our  neiglibor  equal  to  that 
which  we  bear  to  ourselves.  True,  we  enjoy  a  larger 
amount  of  light  and  privilege  than  did  God's  people  of 
old ;  but  this  does  not  touch  the  identity  of  the  church, 
any  more  than  an  accession  of  rights  and  immunities 
conferred  upon  an  individual,  or  corporation,  or  a  town, 
affects  their  identity.  They  are  still  the  same  individu- 
al, corporation  or  town  notwithstanding  the  enlargement 
of  their  powers  and  privileges.  A  man  of  fifty  years  of 
age  is  the  same  individual  that  he  was  when  an  infant  at 
his  mother's  breast,  and  the  sturdy  oak  of  a  century  is 
the  same  tree  that  it  was  when  a  yielding  sapling,  and 


SECOND   ARGUMENT.  49 

yet  it  is  known  that  both  the  man  and  the  tree  have  again 
and  again  changed  their  component  particles.  So  the 
church  of  God  now  in  her  matnj-ity  and  in  the  plenitude 
of  her  light  and  privilege,  is  the  identical  church  that  she 
was  in  her  nonage  and  in  the  paucity  of  her  light  and 
privilege.^  Under  the  former  just  as  well  as  under  the 
present  dispensation,  she  was  therefore,  to  all  intents  and 
purposes,  a  gospel  church. 

In  reply  to  the  objection,  that  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment church  is  totally  distinct,  and  that  the  old  was  abol- 
ished, and  an  entirely  new  church  erected  in  its  stead  ; 
so  that  if  infant  membership  were  intended  to  be  retained, 
it  must  needs  be  commanded  anew  ;    the  Rev.  Doctor 
Schmucker  thus  remarks  :  "  The  New  Testament,  how- 
ever, teaches  a  different  doctrine,  representing  the  Chris- 
tian church  as  built  on  the  Jewish,  as  being  only  the  more 
perfect  and  complete  economy  of  the  one  church  of  God. 
'  Think  not,'  says  the  blessed  Saviour,   '  that  I  am  come 
to  destroy  the  law,  or  the  prophets  ;  I  am  not  come  to 
destroy,  but  to  fulfill ;'  or  rather,  to  make  i^erfect,  (  7r\„- 
tctTM^  to  complete.^)     The  Apostle  Paul,  also,  speaking 
of  the  future  restoration  of  the  Jews,  says  :  They  also, 
if  they  abide  not  still  in  unbelief,  shall  be  grafted  in  :  for 
God  is  able  to  graff  them  in  again. — For  if  thou  (gentile) 
wert  cut  out  of  the  olive  tree,  that  is  wild  by  nature 
(heathenism) ;  and  wert  graffed  contrary  to  nature,  into  a 
good  olive   tree   (the   Jewisli  church)  ;  how  much  more 
shall  these  (Jews),  who  are  natural  branches  be  graffed 
into    their  own   olive  tree    (church)  ?      The  good  olive 
tree  here  must  signify  the  Jews,  either  as  a  nation  or 
a  religious    community,   a    church  of  God.      It   cannot 
mean  the  former,  for  the  gentiles  never  were  graffed  on 

"Gal.  iv.  1—6.  ^Matt.  v.  17. 

5 


50  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

the  Jewish  nation.  It  must  then  mean  the  church.  Now 
the  apostle  teaches,  that  the  Jews  were  cut  off  from  this 
church  by  unbeHef,  and  the  gentiles  received  or  graffed 
into  it;  and  in  the  fullness  of  time  the  Jews  shall  again 
be  received  into  their  own  church,  or  olive  tree,  which 
must  therefore  be  still  standing  :  that  is,  the  Christian 
and  Jewish  churches  are  essentially  one  and  the  same 
church.  When  therefore  an  ordinance  is  once  estab- 
lished, it  remains  in  force  until  revoked  by  God.  Hence, 
as  infant  membership  has  confessedly  not  been  revoked 
by  God,  our  conclusion  irresistibly  follows,  that  we  are 
not  at  liberty  to  reject  it.'" 

The  third  point  to  be  made  out  in  this  chain  of  rea- 
soning, is — 

3.  That  children  are,  in  virtue  of  their  birth  from, 
Christian  parents,  members  of  the  church  under  the 
new  dispensation. 

Having  abundantly  sustained  this  position  in  reference 
to  children  born  under  the  old  economy,  it  is  self-evident 
that  they  occupy  the  same  relation  to  the  church  under 
the  existing  economy,  (the  covenant  establishing  it,  being 
of  perpetual  obligation,)  unless  it  has  been  rescinded.  But 
we  boldly  challenge  the  world  to  produce  one  particle  of 
evidence  in  proof  of  its  revocation.  We  take  high  ground 
here  and  use  strong  language,  but  we  do  it  without  fear  of 
successful  contradiction.  If  God,  who  nearly  four  thou- 
sand years  ago,  by  an  express  statute,  constituted  the  chil- 
dren of  believing  parents,  members  of  his  church,  has 
annulled  that  statute,  or  by  any  direct  or  indirect,  posi- 
tive or  implied  warrant,  withdrawn  the  privilege  which 
it  vouchsafed  to  them,  let  the  testimony  be  forthcoming. 
But  there  is  no  such  testimony  to  be  found  either  in  the 
Old  or  New  Testament,  and  therefore  the  church-mem- 

iSee  Popular  Theology  p.  212. 


SECOND    ARGUMENT.  51 

bership  of  infants  remains  unrevoked,  unimpaired,  un- 
touched, and  in  all  the  primitive  force  with  which  divine 
authority  originally  invested  it. 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Schmucker's  (junior)  statement  of  this 
argument  is  alike  remarkable  for  its  cogency  and  its  bre- 
vity: "An  ordinance  which  God  himself  appointed  in 
his  church,  and  which  he  never  revoked,  we  have  no 
right  to  reject ; 

"•Bat  God  did  confessedly  appoint  infant  membership  in 
his  cliurch,  and  did  never  revoke  it ; 

"  Therefore  ive  have  no  right  to  revoke  it."' 

The  language  of  Dr.  Mason  on  this  branch  of  our  sub- 
ject is  too  eloquent  to  be  omitted. 

"Conceding,  then,"  says  he,  "to  the  opposers  of  our 
children's  claim  as  members  of  the  Christian  church,  all 
that  they  ask  with  regard  to  the  silence  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament, that  very  concession  works  their  ruin.  If  their 
views  are  correct,  it  could  not  have  been  thus  silent.  Out 
of  their  own  mouths  we  draw  their  conviction ;  and  cast 
them  in  the  judgment  by  the  very  evidence  which  they 
offer  in  their  vindication. 

"  The  case  is  now  reversed.  Instead  of  our  producing 
from  the  New  Testament  such  a  warrant  for  the  privileges 
of  our  infant  seed,  as  they  require,  we  turn  the  tables 
upon  them  ;  and  insist,  that  they  shall  produce  scriptural 
proof  of  God's  having  annulled  the  constitution  under 
7vhich  ive  assert  our  right.  Till  they  do  this,  our  cause 
is  invincible.  He  once  granted  to  his  church  the  right 
for  which  we  contend;  and  nothing  but  his  own  act  can 
take  it  aAvay.  We  want  to  see  the  act  of  abrogation ; 
we  must  see  it  in  the  New  Testament ;  for  there  it  is,  if 
it  is  at  all.     Point  it  out,  and  we  have  done.     Till  then 

'See  Popular  Theology,  p.  211. 


52  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

we  shall  rejoice  in  the  consolation  of  calling  upon  God 
as  our  God;  and  the  God  of  our  seed.      *     *     *     * 

"  The  case  is  still  stronger  when  we  reflect  that  the  chil- 
dren of  believing  parents  participate  in  all  the  disasters 
of  tlie  external  church.  If  she  be  corrupted,  the  corrup- 
tion infects  them ;  if  she  be  persecuted,  the  persecution 
smites  them ;  if  her  mercies  be  sinned  away,  the  punish- 
ment of  the  sin  lights  on  them.  Could  they  suffer  more 
upon  the  supposition  of  their  being  really  members  ?  It 
seems,  then,  that  they  are  to  share  in  all  her  afflictions, 
Avithout  sharing  in  her  privileges :  that  when  evil  over- 
takes her,  they  are  to  be  treated  as  citizens ;  but  when 
immunities  are  dispensed,  as  aliens.  So  that  the  Lord 
our  God  suspends  a  leading  principle  of  his  physical  and 
moral  order,  for  the  sake  of  barring  the  seed  of  his  peo- 
ple from  privilege i  and  permits  it  to  take  its  full  course 
for  the  infliction  of  calamity !  This  is  more  than  incredi- 
ble !"» 

We  come  now  to  the  last  particular  to  be  established, 
which  develops  the  gist  of  the  whole  argument,  and  in 
fact  is  the  argument  that  stands  at  the  head  of  this  arti- 
cle, viz. — 

3.  That  baptism  is  the  appointed  token  of  church 
membership  in  the  Neiv  Testament. 

This  is  evident  from  the  fact,  that  as  circumcision  was 
confessedly  the  sealing  ordinance  in  the  former  economy, 
and  baptism  has  been  substituted  for  it,  therefore  baptism 
is  now  the  sealing  ordinance,  and  must  of  course  be  ad- 
ministered to  infants,  because  infants  are  the  declared 
members  of  God's  church  and  subjects  of  his  covenant. 

Our  Baptist  brethren  however  deny  this  position,  main- 
taining that  as  there  are  some  points  of  difference  between 

'See  Cliristian  Mag.  II.  27,  &c. 


SECOND    ARGUMENT.  53 

Circumcision  and  baptism,  therefore  the  latter  cannot  be  a 
substitute  for  the  former.     But  does  it  follow,  when  one 
tiling  is  put  in  the  place  of  another,  that  there  must  be  in 
every  respect  a  perfect  resemblance  between  them  ? — by 
no  means.     All  that  is  requisite  to  constitute  a  substitute 
is,  that  there  should  be  a  general  agreement  as  to  the  main 
object  in  view,  or  the  great  end  to  be  accomplished;  this 
being  the  case,  there  may  be  a  variety  of  discrepancies 
without  in  the  least  affecting  the  principle  of  substitu- 
tion.    For  instance,  in  time  of  war  a  man  may  be  drafted 
to  proceed  to  the  frontiers  to  defend  his  country;   he 
employs  another  to  take  his  place;  there  is  a  considera- 
ble difference  between  them  in  age,  stature,  complexion, 
temper,  habits,  physical  and  mental  powers,  and  other 
respects;   yet  the  great  object  to  be  attained,  being  the 
same,  the  latter  goes  in  the  room  of  the  former,  and  is 
properly  and  legally  his  substitute.     A  superintendent  of 
a  Sunday  school,  about  to  leave  home  for  a  few  weeks, 
requests  his  Christian  neighbor  to  supply  his  place  during 
his  absence;  there  may  and  probably  will  be  numerous 
points  of  even  striking  dissimilarity ;— perhaps  in  person 
and  appearance,  talents  and  acquirements,  intellect  and 
endowments,  aptness  for  imparting  instruction,  piety  and 
fervor,  &c. ;  yet  the  principal  end  to  be  answered,  being 
identical,  the  one  is  justly  regarded  as  the  substitute  o'f 
the  other.     So  our  houses  of  worship  are  represented  as 
coming  in  the  place  of  the  Jewish  temple  and  synagogues, 
because  they  contemplate  the  same  great  object,  which  is 
to   afibrd  convenience  for  public  Avorship  and  religious 
instruction;  yet  in  their  construction,  dimensions,  mode 
of  worship,  &c.,  they  differ  vastly.     The  Lord's  supper 
is  often  referred  to  as  having  come  in  the  place  of  the 
passover;   gospel  ministers    in   the  room   of  Levitir-al 
5* 


54  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

priests ;  the  simplicity  of  Christian  worship  instead  of 
the  gorgeous  services  of  the  temple,  &c.  Certainly,  in 
all  these  exemplifications  of  substitution  there  is  a  gene- 
ral concurrence  as  to  the  main  object,  but  in  numerous 
instances  the  contrast  is  exceedingly  glaring.  In  like 
manner,  our  Lord  himself  became  a  substitute ;  he  as- 
sumed our  form  and  nature,  put  himself  in  our  place  and 
"bare  our  sins  in  his  own  body  on  the  tree,"  What  an 
infinite  disparity  between  him  and  us,  in  dignity,  the 
mode  and  duration  of  sufljering  for  sin,  &c.  &c. ;  yet  the 
great  purpose  of  suffering  being  the  same,  namely,  the 
vindication  of  divine  justice  and  the  fulfillment  of  divine 
laM^  he  was  emphatically  the  substitute  of  a  rebel  world. 
The  illustration  may  be  extended  to  civil  matters.  An 
old  law  is  repealed  and  another  enacted  in  its  stead ;  but 
according  to  the  new  enactment,  the  constituents  of  the 
crime  contemplated,  the  evidence  required  to  establish  it, 
the  penalty,  the  mode  of  inflicting  it,  &c.,  may  all  differ 
from  the  provisions  of  the  former  statute  ;  yet  the  object 
being  precisely  similar,  viz.  the  prevention  of  some  par- 
ticular species  of  felony,  the  one  is  termed  and  published 
as  a  substitute  for  the  other. 

We  have  dwelt  at  some  length  on  this  point,  because 
it  is  of  the  utmost  importance,  and  we  desire  to  be  dis- 
tinctly understood.  Having  now  a  clear  apprehension  of 
what  is  meant  by  a  substitute,  or  one  thing  coming  in  the 
place  of  another,  let  us  proceed  to  inquire  whether  there 
be  a  general  agreement  in  the  great  object  contemplated 
by  circumcision  and  baptism, — a  suflicient  resemblance 
in  the  leading  purpose,  to  warrant  the  doctrine  of  substi- 
tution. Circumcision  had  a  spiritual  meaning,  so  has  bap- 
tism ;  circumcision  Avas  a  seal  of  a  covenant  guarantying 
not  only  temporal  but  also  and  chiefly  spiritual  blessings. 


SECOND    ARGUMENT.  55 

SO  baptism  is  the  badge  of  an  external  relation  and  out- 
ward advantages,  but  is  mainly  the  seal  of  spiritual  bless- 
ings. "Circumcision,"  says  an  eminent  divine,  "was  an 
emblem  of  moral'  cleansing  and  purity.  So  is  baptism. 
It  refers  to  the  remission  of  sins  by  the  blood  of  Christ, 
and  regeneration  by  his  Spirit;  and  teaches  us  that  Ave 
are  by  nature  guilty  and  depraved,  and  stand  in  need  of 
the  pardoning  and  sanctifying  grace  of  God  by  a  crucified 
Redeemer.  Surely,  then,  there  is  the  best  foundation 
for  asserting  that  baptism  has  come  in  the  place  of  cir- 
cumcision. The  latter,  as  all  grant,  has  been  discon- 
tinued ;  and  now  baptism  occupies  the  same  place,  means 
the  same  thing,  seals  the  same  covenant,  and  is  a  pledge 
of  the  same  spiritual  blessings.  Who  can  doubt,  then, 
that  there  is  the  utmost  propriety,  upon  principle,  in 
applying  it  to  the  same  infant  subjects  ?"  ' 

We  may  here  add,  that  an  early  father,  Justin  iNIartyr, 
takes  the  same  view  of  the  substitution  of  circumcision 
by  Christian  baptism  :  "We  gentiles,"  Justin  observes, 
"  have  not  received  that  circumcision  according  to  the 
flesh,  but  that  which  is  spiritual — and  moreover,  for  in- 
deed we  were  sinners,  we  have  received  this  in  baptism^ 
through  God's  mercy,  and  it  is  enjoined  on  all  to  receive 
it  in  like  manner." 

"  Yet,  though  baptism  manifestly  comes  in  the  place  of 
circumcision,  there  are  points  in  regard  to  which  the 
former  diflers  materially  from  the  latter.  And  it  differs 
precisely  as  to  those  points  in  regard  to  Avhich  the  New 
Testament  economy  differs  from  the  old,  in  being  more 
enlarged  and  less  ceremonial.  Baptism  is  not  ceremoni- 
ally restricted  to  the  eighth  day,  but  may  be  administered 
at  any  time  and  place.  It  is  not  confined  to  one  sex,  but 
like  the  glorious  dispensation  of  which  it  is  a  seal,  it 


56  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

marks  an  enlarged  privilege,  and  is  administered  in  a 
way  which  reminds  us  that  '  there  is  neither  Greek  nor 
Jew,  neither  bond  nor  free,  neither  male  nor  female,  in 
the  Christian  economy ;  but  that  we  are  all  one  in  Christ 
Jesus.' '" 

'See  Miller  on  Infant  Baptism,  p.  13. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

OBJECTIONS    TO    THIS   ARGUMENT. 

First  Objection.  The  circumcision  of  infants  was 
an  express  and  positive  institution,  but  their  baptism  is 
not,  and  however  admissible  it  may  be,  in  a  general 
point  of  view,  to  argue  the  necessity  of  moral  duty  by 
inferential  reasoning,  yet  in  cases  of  positive  institu- 
tion it  is  insufficient ;  nothing  short  of  the  most  direct 
and  explicit  authority  can  avail  in  matters  of  this  cha- 
racter. 

Answer. — This  is  a  new  principle  set  up  by  our  Bap- 
tist brethren,  in  order  to  escape  the  irresistible  argument 
based  on  the  church-membership  and  circumcision  of 
infants  under  the  Mosaic  dispensation.  But  it  is  as  un- 
sound as  it  is  novel.  As  circumstantial  evidence  in  a 
court  of  justice  may  be  and  often  is  as  clear  and  strong 
as  positive,  so  inferential  and  analogical  reasoning  is  fre- 
quently as  conclusive  as  any  other.  This  point  is  too 
obvious  to  require  further  illustration,  and  hence  we  find 
that  our  Baptist  brethren  themselves  tacitly  admit  it 
at  the  very  moment  that  they  profess  to  be  governed  by 
the  principles  assumed  in  the  objection.  For  it  is  con- 
ceded that  the  Lord's  supper  is  a  positive  institution,  and 
that  females  are  positively  bound  to  partake  of  it,  but 
where  in  the  Sacred  Scriptures  do  we  find  a  direct  pre- 
cept, or  even  an  explicit  example  to  warrant  them  in 
doing  so  ? — How  then  do  our  opponents  arrive  at  the 


58  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

conclusion  that  it  is  the  duty  of  females  to  commune  ? — 
Undoubtedly  by  inferential  reasoning,  and  that  too  of 
the  most  convincing  nature  which  can  never  be  refuted, 
and  yet  not  more  convincing  or  irrefutable  than  that 
chain  of  logic  by  Avhich  we  prove  infant  baptism.  As 
often  then  as  they  admit  women  to  a  participation  of  the 
holy  supper,  they  fly  from  the  principle  involved  in  their 
own  objection,  and  yield,  in  reference  to  a  positive  insti- 
tution, to  the  force  of  argument  derived  altogether  from 
inference  and  analogy.  Would  it  not  be  better  to  aban- 
don the  unsound  principle  and  succumb  to  the  poAver  of 
solid  logical  deduction  ? 


Second  Objection. — "  If  baptism  succeeded  in  the 
place  of  circumcision,  how  came  it  that  both  of  them 
were  in  full  force  at  the  same  time,  that  is,  from  the 
commencement  of  John's  ministry  to  the  death  of  Christ? 
For  one  thing  to  come  in  the  room  of  another,  and  the 
latter  to  hold  its  place,  is  an  odd  kind  of  succession. 
Admitting  the  succession  pretended,  how  came  it  that 
Paul  circumcised  Timothy,  after  he  had  been  baptized?" 
Thus  far  Mr.  Booth, — but  in  order  to  make  this  objec- 
tion still  more  cogent,  Ave  add, — how  shall  Ave  account 
for  Paul's  silence  on  the  subject,  Avhen  it  Avas  knoAvn  to 
him  that  some  of  the  HebrcAv  believers  still  practised 
circumcision  ? 

Answer.  Baptism  could  not  be  made  the  sign  and 
seal  of  the  perfected  covenant  of  grace,  until  that  coa'c- 
nant  was  both  perfected  and  proposed  for  acceptance, 
which  did  not  take  place  until  after  "  the  blood  of  the 
everlasting  covenant"  was  shed,  and  our  Lord,  after  his 
resurrection,  had  opened  its  full  import  to  the  apostles, 


OBJECTIONS.  59 

who  were  to  publish  it  "  to  all  nations."  Accordingly, 
we  find  that  baptism  was  formally  made  the  seal  of  this 
covenant  for  the  first  time  when  our  Lord  commissioned 
his  disciples  to  "  go  and  disciple  all  nations,  baptizing 
them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghost," — "  he  that  believeth  and  is  baptized 
shall  be  saved."  John's  baptism  was  upon  profession 
of  repentance  and  faith  in  the  speedy  appearance  of  Him 
who  was  to  baptize  with  tlie  Holy  Ghost  and  fire ;  and 
our  Lord's  baptism  by  Ids  disciples  was  administered  to 
those  Jews  that  believed  on  him,  as  the  Messias,  all  of 
whom,  like  the  apostles,  waited  for  a  fuller  development 
of  his  character  and  offices  ;  both  ihercfore  looked  for 
something  yet  to  come,  and  was  not  certainly  tliat  bap- 
tism in  the  name  "  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  wliich  was  afterwards  instituted  as 
tlie  standing,  confirmatory  I'ite  of  membership  in  the 
Christian  church. 

As  for  the  circumcision  of  Timothy,  and  the  practice 
of  that  rite  among  many  of  the  Hebrew  believers,  we 
observe,  that  there  are  two  grounds  on  which  circumcis- 
ion may  be  conceived  to  have  been  innocently,  though 
not  wisely,  practised  among  the  Christian  Jews.  The 
first  was  that  of  preserving  an  ancient  national  distinc- 
tion on  which  they  valued  themselves ;  and  M'ere  a  con- 
verted Jew  in  the  present  day  disposed  to  perform  that 
rite  upon  his  children  for  this  purpose  only,  renouncing 
in  the  act  all  consideration  of  it  as  a  sign  and  seal  of  the 
old  covenant,  or  as  obliging  to  ceremonial  acts  in  order 
to  justification,  no  one  would  censure  him  with  severity. 
It  appears  clear  that  it  was  under  some  such  view  that 
St.  Paul  circumcised  Timothy,  whose  mother  was  a 
Jewess;  he  did  it  because  of  "the  Jews  which  were  in 


60  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

those  quarters,"  that  is,  because  of  their  national  preju- 
dices, "for  they  knew  his  father  was  a  Greek."  The 
second  Avas  a  lingering  notion  that,  even  in  the  Christian 
church,  the  Jews  who  believed  would  still  retain  some 
degree  of  eminence,  some  superior  relation  to  God ;  a 
notion  wliich,  however  unfounded,  was  not  one  which 
demanded  direct  rebuke,  when  it  did  not  proudly  refuse 
spiritual  communion  with  the  converted  gentiles,  but  was 
held  by  men  who  "rejoiced  that  God  had  granted  to  the 
gentiles  repentance  unto  life."  These  considerations 
may  account  for  the  silence  of  St.  Paul  on  the  subject  of 
circumcision  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  Some  of 
them  continued  to  practice  that  rite,  but  they  Avere  proba- 
bly believers  of  the  class  just  mentioned;  for,  had  he 
tliought  that  the  rite  was  continued  among  them  on  any 
principle  which  affected  the  fundamental  doctines  of  Chris- 
tianity, he  would  no  doubt  have  been  equally  prompt  and 
fearless  in  pointing  out  that  apostasy  from  Christ  which 
was  implied  in  it.  We  have  a  remarkable  proof  of  the 
correctness  of  this  view  of  the  subject  in  the  fact,  that  on 
another  occasion  Paul  resolutely  refused  to  permit  cir- 
cumcision to  be  administered  to  a  gentile  convert.  We 
read  in  the  epistle  to  the  Galatians,  that  certain  Judaizing 
teachers,  whom  the  apostle  terms  "false  brethren,"  were 
anxious  that  he  should  circumcise  Titus;  their  object 
appears  to  have  been,  had  they  succeeded,  to  use  the 
authority  of  the  apostle's  example  to  practise  the  rite 
among  other  converts  from  the  gentiles,  and  so  bring 
tliem  under  bondage  to  the  law  of  Moses.  But  when  the 
rite  was  to  be  administered  with  this  view ;  when  the 
motive  was  not  simply  to  preserve  a  favorite  national  dis- 
tinction, but  to  oblige  the  subject  to  observe  tlie  Mosaic 
ceremonies   as  a   partial   ground  of  justification  before 


OBJECTIONS.  61 

God ;  then  Paul  promptly  resisted  it  with  great  decision ; 
he  at  once  took  high  ground  and  maintained  that  ground 
with  his  usual  boldness,  observing  in  relation  to  those 
Judaizing  teachers:  "To  whom  we  gave  place  by  sub- 
jection, no  not  for  an  hour;  that  the  truth  of  the  gospel 
might  continue  with  you.'" 

Circumcision  might  therefore  be  practised  with  views 
so  opposite,  that  on  one  occasion  it  might  be  wholly  inno- 
cent, although  an  infirmity  of  prejudice ;  while  on  the 
other,  it  would  involve  a  rejection  of  the  doctrine  of  jus- 
tification by  faith  in  Christ.  This  remark  will  apply 
with  equal  force  to  the  observance  of  "days  and  months, 
and  times,  and  years"  for  which  the  Galatians  were  re- 
proved. If  Baptist  writers  could  show  that  the  apostles 
sanctioned  the  practice  of  circumcision  as  a  seal  of  the 
old  covenant,  then  there  would  be  some  force  in  the  argu- 
ment that  one  could  not  succeed  the  other,  if  both  Avere 
continued  under  inspired  authority.  But  we  have  the 
most  decided  testimony  of  the  Apostle  Paul  against  any 
such  use  of  circumcision ;  and  he  makes  it,  when  prac- 
tised in  that  view,  a  total  abnegation  of  Christ  and  the 
new  covenant.  It  follows,  then,  that  when  circumcision 
was  continued  by  any  connivance  of  the  apostles,— and 
certainly  they  did  no  more  than  connive  at  it, — it  was 
practised  upon  some  grounds  which  did  not  regard  it  as 
the  seal  of  any  covenant ; — from  national  custom  or  pre- 
judice, a  feeling  to  which  the  Apostle  Paul  himself  yielded 
in  the  case  of  Timothy.  He  circumcised  him,  but  not 
from  any  conviction  of  necessity,  since  he  uniformly 
declared  circumcision  to  have  vanished  away  with  that 
dispensation  of  the  covenant  of  which  it  was  the  seal 
through  the  bringing  in  of  a  better  hope. 

iGal.  ii.  1—5. 
6 


62  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

Third  Objection. — If  baptism  has  been  substituted 
for  circumcision,  why  is  it  not  as  universal  in  the  Chris- 
tian church  as  circumcision  was  in  the  Jewish  church  ? 

Answer. — Because  professing  Christians  are  not  as 
mindful  of  this  duty  as  they  ought  to  be.  The  precept 
to  administer  baptism  is  at  least  coequal  in  extent  of 
application,  to  that  requiring  circumcision,  and  every 
father  and  mother  who  hear  the  gospel  are  bound  to  em- 
brace it,  to  profess  it  and  to  comply  with  its  invitations, 
and  if  they  v/ould  yield  to  duty,  we  should  not  have  a 
child  in  the  land  growing  up  without  this  sacramental 
seal.  This  objection  then  does  not  militate  against  infant 
baptism,  but  against  the  remissness  of  many  who  profess 
to  believe  in  it ;  at  the  same  time  it  pronounces  a  censure 
upon  the  Baptists  who  urge  it,  for  they  too  as  well  as 
inconsistent  professors,  aid  in  restricting  the  prevalence 
of  the  practice  in  question.  In  one  respect  however,  bap- 
tism is  more  universal  than  circumcision  was  ;  it  is  ad- 
ministered to  both  sexes,  whereas  the  seal  of  the  old  cove- 
nant was  confined  to  males.  But  this  suggests  another  ob- 
jection, the  very  reverse  of  the  one  under  consideration. 


Fourth  Objection. — If  baptism  has  come  in  the 
place  of  circumcision,  why  is  it  not  limited  to  male  in- 
fants ;— females  were  excluded  from  circumcision,  must 
they  not  then  by  consequence  be  debarred  from  the  seal 
of  the  new  covenant  ? 

This  apparent  difficulty  has  already  been  anticipated 
and  fully  met  on  a  preceding  page,  by  a  correct  exhibi- 
tion of  the  constituent  feature  of  a  substituted  But  a 
few  additional  remarks  will  place  the  subject  in  a  still 
clearer  light. 

'  See  pages  53  and  54. 


OBJECTIONS,  63 

The  objection  before  us,  like  many  others,  proves  too 
much ;  for  as  adult  females  did  not  receive  the  seal  of 
the  covenant  any  more  than  infant  females,  it  would 
necessarily  exclude  the  former  also  from  a  covenant  rela- 
tion to  God,  and  this  is  doubtless  more  than  the  objector 
would  like  to  see  established.  Will  our  Baptist  brethren 
deny  that  adult  females  were  members  of  the  visible 
church  of  God  under  the  old  dispensation  ?  and  yet  they 
received  not  the  token  of  membership  ! 

AVe  readily  grant  that  there  was  no  external  ordinance 
of  divine  appointment  by  Avhich  infant  females  were  per- 
sonally recognized  as  members  of  the  Jewish  church,  and 
yet  they  were  plainly  included  in  the  stipulations  of  the 
covenant,  and  were  members,  and  when  they  attained 
a  proper  age,  enjoyed  all  its  privileges.  If  a  gentile 
family  became  proselytes,  the  adult  and  infant  males 
were  circumcised ;  but  the  females,  adult  as  well  as 
infant,  became  members  of  the  church  Avithout  any  exter- 
nal rite  other  than  proselyte  baptism,  by  virtue  of  their 
connection  with  the  males.  In  this,  as  in  many  other 
cases,  they  were  evidently  considered  as  represented  by 
the  men,  and  virtually  included  with  them.  Even  in  the 
present  day  females  are  in  numerous  instances  regarded 
as  being  represented  by  males  ;  they  have  no  vote,  are 
not  eligible  to  office,  &c. ;  these  restrictions  prevailed  to  a 
still  gi-eater  extent  among  the  Jews.  Both  in  church 
and  state  their  rights  were  in  some  respects  absorbed  in 
those  of  the  men ; — circumcision  furnishes  an  illustration 
of  this  very  fact.  Consequently  the  meaning  of  circum- 
cision must  have  been  the  same  as  though  it  had  been 
applied  to  both  sexes.  But  under  the  new  dispensation 
Christ  has  appointed  an  ordinance,  alike  applicable  to 
males   and   females ;    hence,   the   distinction    that   once 


64  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

existed  (which  was  only  in  form  and  not  in  substance) 
is  now  done  away,  and  God  requires  the  seal  to  be 
applied  to  adults  of  both  sexes,  and  of  course  to  all  their 
children  whether  sons  or  daughters.  The  extension  of 
this  ordinance  to  female  cliildren,  is  no  greater  enlarge- 
ment of  privilege  than  might  be  expected  from  the  supe- 
riority of  the  new  economy  over  the  old  ;  and  it  impres- 
sively reminds  us  that  in  this  new,  more  expanded  and 
glorious  dispensation,  "  there  is  neither  bond  nor  free, 
neither  male  nor  female,  but  that  we  are  all  one  in  Christ 
Jesus." 

There  is  however  another  very  obvious  reason  why 
the  new  seal  of  God's  covenant  should  be  conferred  on 
females.  Under  the  old  dispensation,  no  messengers 
"were  sent  forth  to  proselyte  the  gentiles,  so  that  when 
proselytes  were  made,  the  whole  family  came  together ; 
Avhilst  among  the  Jews  all  professed  faith.  But  noAV  the 
gospel  is  preached  "to  every  creature,"  and  it  often 
occurs,  that  the  females  in  a  family  are  converted,  while 
the  head  of  the  family  and  all  the  males  continue  unbe- 
lievers. It  is  manifestly  proper  therefore  that  every  indi- 
vidual should  receive  baptism.  Accordingly,  as  adult 
females  are  recognized  as  members  of  the  church  by  a 
divine  ordinance,  which  was  formerly  not  the  case,  so 
infant  females  receive  the  seal  of  the  covenant,  which 
they  formerly  did  not. 

To  conclude,  does  not  this  objection  involve  a  denial 
of  the  advantage  of  circumcision? — and  if  so,  must  not 
our  Baptist  brethren  be  "  hard  run"  for  objections  to 
infant  baptism,  that  they  should  run  counter  to  God's 
word?' 

'See  Rom.  ii.  25,  and  iii.  1,2. 


OBJECTIONS.  65 

Fifth  Objection. — If  now  as  formerly  infants  are  by 
virtue  of  their  birth,  members  of  the  church  of  God, 
and  consequently  entitled  to  the  sacramental  seal  of 
membership,  why  are  they  not  treated  as  such  ; — church 
members,  whether  young  or  old,  should  be  instructed, 
watched  over,  and  disciplined  when  circumstances  re- 
quire it,  by  the  church ;  but  are  infant  members  thus 
treated  by  the  advocates  of  their  baptism  ? 

It  must  be  acknowledged  that  there  is  great  force  in 
this  objection,  not  however  against  the  membership  or 
baptism  of  children,  but  in  its  application  to  individual 
churches  and  their  officers.  Doubtless  it  is  the  official 
duty  of  ministers,  elders  and  deacons  to  look  well  to  the 
moral  education  of  the  children  of  the  church,  who  by 
their  baptism  have  been  recognized  and  proclaimed  as 
members ;  and  it  is  a  matter  of  serious  regret  and  deep 
reproach  that  this  most  important  obligation  is  so  gene- 
rally neglected.  Was  it  not  God's  design  in  instituting 
the  church,  to  "  purify  unto  himself  a  peculiar  people 
zealous  of  good  works?" — Are  not  children  just  as  em- 
phatically as  their  parents,  comprehended  in  that  cove- 
nant Avhich  contemplates  the  separation  of  a  holy  people 
from  the  world  that  lieth  in  wickedness,  and  the  training 
up  of  a  spiritual  and  godly  seed  for  the  glory  of  the 
Lord? — And  is  not  the  sealing  ordinance  intended  to 
mark  and  distinguish  all  those  whom  he  designed  to 
purify?  Upon  what  grounds  then  can  the  church  justify 
or  apologize  for  its  delinquency  in  this  respect  ?  It  is 
unquestionably  a  most  important  duty  to  provide  for  the 
religious  instruction  of  adult  members,  and  to  exercise 
spiritual  inspection  and  discipline  in  relation  to  them ; 
and  by  what  process  of  reasoning  can  the  church  be 
exempted  from  tlie  discharge  of  like  duty  in  regard 
6* 


66  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

to  infant  and  juvenile  members? — Verily,  Pedobaptist 
churches  are  inconsistent,  and  more  or  less  guilty  in  this 
respect,  and  it  behooves  them  to  inquire  how  they  may 
more  faithfully  discharge  their  obligations  to  "the  lambs 
of  the  flock."  We  think  we  shall  do  an  essential  ser- 
vice here  by  presenting  to  our  readers  the  excellent 
remarks  of  Dr.  Miller  of  Princeton  on  this  subject : 

"  Let  all  baptized  children,  from  the  hour  of  their 
receiving  the  seal  of  God's  covenant,  be  recorded  and 
recognised  as  infant  disciples.  Let  the  officers  of  the 
clmrch,  as  well  as  their  parents  according  to  the  flesh, 
ever  regard  them  with  a  watchful  and  afiectionate  eye. 
Let  Christian  instruction,  Christian  restraint,  and  Chris- 
tian warning,  entreaty  and  prayer  ever  attend  them,  from 
the  mother's  lap  to  the  infant  school,  and  from  the 
infant  school  to  the  seminary,  whatever  it  may  be,  for 
more  mature  instruction.  Let  them  be  early  taught  to 
reverence  and  read  the  word  of  God,  and  to  treasure  up 
select  portions  of  it  in  their  memories.  Let  appropriate 
catechisms,  and  other  sound  compends  of  Christian  truth, 
be  put  into  their  hands,  and  by  incessant  repetition  and 
inculcation  be  impressed  upon  their  minds.  Let  a  school 
or  schools,  according  to  its  extent,  be  established  in  each 
church,  placed  under  the  immediate  instruction  of  exem- 
plary, orthodox,  and  pious  teachers,  carefully  superin- 
tended by  the  pastor,  and  visited  as  often  as  practicable 
by  all  the  ofticers  of  the  church.  Let  these  beloved 
youth  be  often  reminded  of  the  relation  Avhich  they  bear 
to  the  Christian  family ;  and  the  just  claim  of  Christ  to 
their  aff'ections  and  service,  be  often  presented  with  dis- 
tinctness, solemnity,  and  afiiection.  Let  every  kind  of 
error  and  immorality  Jje  faithfully  reproved,  and  as  far 
as  possible  suppressed  in  them.     Let  the  pastor  convene 


OBJECTIONS.  67 

the  baptized  children  as  often  as  practicable,  and  address 
them  with  instruction  and  exhortation  in  the  name  of  that 
God  to  whom  they  have  been  dedicated,  and  every  en- 
deavor made  to  impress  their  consciences  and  their  hearts 
with  gospel  truth.  When  they  come  to  years  of  discre- 
tion, let  them  be  affectionately  reminded  of  their  duty  to 
ratify,  by  their  own  act,  the  vows  made  by  their  parents 
in  baptism,  and  be  urged,  again  and  again,  to  give,  first 
their  hearts,  and  then  the  humble  acknowledgment  of  an 
outward  profession,  to  the  Saviour.  Let  this  plan  be 
pursued  faithfully,  constantly,  patiently,  and  with  parent- 
al tenderness.  If  instruction  and  exhortation  be  disre- 
garded, and  a  course  of  error,  immorality,  or  negligence 
be  indulged  in,  let  warning,  admonition,  suspension,  or 
excommunication  ensue,  according  to  the  character  of  the 
individual,  and  the  exigencies  of  the  case.  'What!' 
some  will  be  disposed  to  say,  '  suspend  or  excommuni- 
cate a  young  person,  who  has  never  yet  taken  his  seat  at 
a  sacramental  table,  nor  even  asked  for  that  privilege  V 
Certainly.  Why  not?  If  the  children  of  professing 
Christians  are  born  members  of  the  church,  and  are  bap- 
tized as  a  sign  and  seal  of  this  membership,  nothing  can 
be  plainer  than  that  they  ought  to  be  treated  in  every  re- 
spect as  church  members,  and,  of  course,  if  they  act  in 
an  unchristian  manner,  a  bar  ought  to  be  set  up  in  the 
way  of  their  enjoying  Christian  privileges.  If  this  be 
not  admitted,  we  must  give  up  the  very  first  principles  of 
ecclesiastical  order  and  duty.  Nor  is  there,  obviously 
any  thing  more  incongruous  in  suspending  or  excluding 
from  church  privileges  a  young  man,  or  young  woman, 
who  has  been  baptized  in  infancy,  and  trained  up  in  the 
bosom  of  the  church,  but  has  now  no  regard  for  religion, 
than  there  is  in  suspending  or  excommunicating  one  who 


68  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

has  been,  for  many  years,  an  attendant  on  the  Lord's 
table,  but  has  now  forsaken  the  house  of  God,  and  has 
no  longer  any  desire  to  approach  a  Christian  ordinance. 
No  one  would  consider  it  as  either  incongruous  or  unrea- 
sonable to  declare  such  a  person  unworthy  of  Christian 
fellowship,  and  excluded  from  it,  though  he  had  no  dis- 
position to  enjoy  it.  The  very  same  principle  applies  in 
the  case  now  under  consideration. 

"  It  has  been  supposed,  indeed,  by  some  Pedobaptists, 
that  although  every  baptized  child  is  a  regular  church 
member,  he  is  a  member  only  of  the  general  visible 
church,  and  not  in  the  ordinary  sense,  of  any  particular 
church ;  and,  therefore,  that  he  is  not  amenable  to  eccle- 
siastical discipline  until  he  formally  connects  himself  with 
some  particular  church.  This  doctrine  appears  to  me 
subversive  of  every  principle  of  ecclesiastical  order. 
Every  baptized  child  is,  undoubtedly,  to  be  considered 
as  a  member  of  the  church  in  which  he  received  baptism, 
until  he  dies,  is  excommunicated,  or  regularly  dismissed 
to  another  church.  And  if  the  time  shall  ever  come 
when  all  our  churches  shall  act  upon  this  plan ;  when 
infant  members  shall  be  watched  over  with  unceasing  and 
affectionate  moral  care ;  when  a  baptized  young  person, 
of  either  sex,  being  not  yet  what  is  called  a  communi- 
cant, shall  be  made  the  subject  of  mild  and  faithful  Chris- 
tian discipline,  if  he  fall  into  heresy  or  immorality ; 
when  he  shall  be  regularly  dismissed,  by  letter,  from  the 
watch  and  care  of  one  church  to  another ;  and  when  all 
his  spiritual  interests  shall  be  guarded,  by  the  church,  as 
well  as  by  his  parents,  with  sacred  and  affectionate  dili- 
gence ;  when  this  efficient  and  faithful  system  shall  be 
acted  upon,  infant  baptism  will  be  universally  acknow- 
ledged as  a  blessing,  and  the  church  will  shine  with  new 
and  spiritual  glory. 


OBJECTIONS.  69 

"  The  truth  is,  if  infant  baptism  were  properly  im- 
proved ;  if  the  profession  which  it  indudes,  and  the  obUga- 
tious  which  it  imposes,  were  suitably  appreciated  and  fol- 
lowed up,  it  would  have  few  opponents,  I  can  no  more 
doubt,  if  this  were  done,  that  it  would  be  blessed  to  the 
saving  and  conversion  of  thousands  of  our  young  people, 
than  I  can  doubt  the  faithfulness  of  a  covenant  of  God. 
Yes,  infant  baptism  is  of  God,  but  the  fault  lies  in  the 
conduct  of  its  advocates.  The  inconsistency  of  its  friends 
has  done  more  to  discredit  it,  than  all  the  arguments  of 
its  opposers,  a  hundred  fold.  Let  us  hope  that  these 
friends  will,  one  day,  arouse  from  their  deplorable  leth- 
argy, and  show  that  they  are  contending  for  an  ordinance 
as  precious  as  it  is  scriptural." 


Sixth  Objection. — If  children  are  members  of  the 
church  by  virtue  of  their  birth,  and  are  publicly  recog- 
nized as  such  in  their  baptism,  Avhat  is  to  hinder  them 
from  coming  to  the  Lord's  supper?  Lideed,  continues 
the  objector,  as  members  it  is  their  duty  to  come  and  no 
one  has  a  right  to  raise  up  any  barrier  whatever,  or  to 
require  their  compliance  Avith  any  further  condition.  And 
yet  some  churches  do  not  permit  them  to  come,  vmtil 
they  submit  to  a  course  of  religious  instruction  and  the 
rite  of  confirmation,  while  others  require  them  to  make  a 
formal  profession  of  religion  in  some  other  way  prior  to 
their  communing. 

Answer. — The  fallacy  of  this  objection  lies  in  the 
supposition  that  there  can  be  no  gradation  of  capacity  for 
the  enjoyment  of  church-membership,  or  that  every 
member,  irrespective  of  age,  condition  or  qualification, 


70  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

must  necessarily  be  entitled  to  the  same  privileges.  If 
this  supposition  were  well  fovinded,  the  objection  would 
not  be  Avithout  force ;  but  as  it  proceeds  from  an  entirely 
erroneous  view,  the  difficulty  is  altogether  imaginary. — 
How  was  it  among  the  Jews  ?  Their  children  were  mem- 
bers of  the  church,  and  recognized  as  such  by  circum- 
cision ;  but  was  it  therefore  lawful  for  them  to  come  to 
the  passover  (the  ordinance  which  has  been  succeeded 
liy  the  holy  supper)  without  regard  to  age  or  any  other 
qualifications  ? — By  no  means  ;  they  were  not  permitted 
to  share  in  that  ordinance  until  they  were  thought  to  be 
old  enough  to  understand  its  nature,  and  not  even  then 
unless  they  were  also  ceremonially  clean.  Previously  to 
their  admission  to  the  passover,  they  were  instructed, 
trained  up  to  religious  exercises,  and  ascertained  to  be 
Avorthy  to  engage  in  that  solemn  festival.  The  age  fixed 
upon  for  their  first  celebration  of  it,  was  for  a  female 
twelve  and  for  a  male  thirteen  years.  Anterior  to  their 
first  participation,  they  were  regarded  as  infant  members 
and  not  under  obligations  to  the  law  or  subject  to  its  pen- 
alties, but  subsequently  they  were  viewed  as  adult  mem- 
I^ers,  and  denominated  "sons  or  daughters  of  the  congre- 
gation of  Israel." — Here  then,  we  have  an  illustration 
derived  from  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  precisely  in  point. 
Jewish  children  were  members  of  the  church,  but  not 
allowed  to  share  in  all  its  privileges  until  they  arrived  at 
the  age  of  discretion,  had  received  instruction  and  could 
voluntarily  and  intelligently  assume  the  obligations  of  the 
law  and  the  engagements  of  the  covenant.  What  then 
becomes  of  the  objection  stated  at  the  beginning  of  this 
paragraph  ? 

But  the  sophistry  of  this  objection  may  yet  further  be 
exposed,  by  a  reference  to  the  established  regulations  of 


OBJECTIONS.  71 

civil  society.  Our  children  are  all  citizens  of  the  state 
in  which  they  are  born;  they  are  plenary  citizens  by 
virtue  of  their  birth,  but  do  they  as  children  enjoy  all  the 
rights  of  citizenship  ?  No,  as  infant  citizens,  the  constitu- 
tion and  laws  guaranty  to  them  a  certain  and  adequate 
amount  of  privilege,  such  as  personal  protection,  provi- 
sion for  subsistence  and  education  if  they  are  in  want, 
&c.  ;  when  they  reach  the  age  of  tAventy-one,  this  amount 
is  greatly  enlarged ;  they  are  then  authorized  to  exercise 
the  elective  franchise,  to  make  contracts,  to  hold  certain 
offices,  &c. ;  but  even  then'they  cannot  enter  into  office 
until  they  have  been  appointed  or  elected,  and  also  taken 
certain  prescribed  oaths  ;  after  they  advance  a  few  years 
more,  they  become  eligible  to  other  and  more  responsi- 
ble posts  of  honor  and  trust.  Thus  we  perceive  that 
there  is  a  difference  in  the  aggregate  of  civil  rights  vouch- 
safed by  the  state  to  citizens  of  dissimilar  ages  and  quali- 
fications ;  but  notwithstanding  this  relative  inequality  or 
limitation  of  prerogative,  which  is  as  necessary  for  the 
good  of  the  state  collectively,  as  it  is  wise  in  reference 
to  the  individuals  more  immediately  concerned,  all  with- 
out distinction  are  universally  regarded  as  citizens.  We 
might  add  other  illustrations,  taken  from  the  restrictions 
and  expansions  of  privilege  prevalent  in  military,  or 
naval,  or  even  social  life,  but  the  foregoing  is  sufficiel^ 
for  our  purpose.  Now  let  these  remarks  be  applied  to 
the  objection  before  us :  all  baptized  children  are  recog- 
nized members  of  the  church,  and  as  such  entitled  to  cer- 
tain advantages  already  specified;  (see  answer  to  last 
objection) ;  but  it  would  be  preposterous  to  maintain,  that 
they  have,  as  infant  members,  a  claim  to  all  the  privi- 
leges, which  the  church  in  the  exercise  of  its  legitimate 
authority,  has  accorded  only  to  adult  members.     When 


72  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

they  attain  to  suitable  age  and  capacity  for  the  exercise 
of  additional  privileges,  when  they  beconie  qualified  to 
"examine  themselves  and  discern  the  Lord's  body,"  and 
profess  a  sincere  desire  to  fly  from  the  wrath  to  come, 
accompanied  by  a  corresponding  life,  then  they  receive 
an  accession  of  privilege, — they  are  confirmed,  thereby 
taking  the  oath  or  assuming  the  pledge  of  allegiance  to 
their  Divine  King,  and  are  admitted  as  guests  at  his  table. 
If  in  after  life  they  prove  faithful  and  evince  suitable 
qualifications,  their  rights  are  increased;  they  may  at  a 
proper  age  be  elected  to  office,  &c.  If  on  tlie  other 
hand,  they  backslide  and  fall  into  gross  error,  their  rights 
are  curtailed ;  if  they  persevere  in  open  vice  they  are 
entirely  exscinded  from  the  church,  just  as  citizens  of  the 
state,  who,  when  they  commit  certain  criminal  actions, 
are  deprived  of  their  freedom  by  imprisonment,  and  in 
aggravated  cases,  cut  off  from  all  their  civil  rights. 


Seventh  Objection. — If  children  of  Christian  parents 
are  born  members  of  the  church,  they  have  no  need  of 
baptism,  they  belong  to  the  church  without  it,  and  it 
becomes  a  work  of  supererogation. 

^  Answer. — Children  of  believing  Jews  were  in  like 
manner  born  members  of  God's  church,  and  yet  he 
appointed  them  to  be  circumcised  in  ratification  of  it ;  on 
the  same  principle  and  for  the  same  end,  he  now  requires 
our  children  to  be  baptized.  If  indeed,  it  were  main- 
tained that  baptism  was  simply  instituted  as  an  initiatory 
rite,  and  contemplated  no  other  end,  the  objection  in 
question  might  not  be  thought  altogether  so  specious  ;  but 
both  suppositions  are  erroneous.  The  ordinance  under 
consideration  is  not  a  constituting,  but  a  setting  forth  and 


OBJECTIONS.  73 

certifying  of  membership.  Moreover,  it  has  other  and 
more  important  designs ;  it  is  the  seal  of  GocVs  everlast- 
ing covenant,  which  is  a  matter  of  the  utmost  moment, 
and  hence  the  objection  is  also  on  this  account  equally 
void  of  point  and  force ;  but  even  on  the  mistaken 
hypothesis  involved  in  it,  it  is  a  sophism.  For  by  a 
similar  process  of  reasoning,  the  necessity  of  the  Lord's 
supper,  and  indeed  of  every  duty  not  in  all  cases  abso- 
lutely essential  to  salvation,  might  be  invalidated.  For 
the  great  condition  of  justification  before  God,  is  faith  in 
Jesus  Christ,  and  if  a  man  believes  with  all  his  heart,  it 
might  with  equal  propriety  be  urged,  he  Avill  inherit  eter- 
nal life  without  communing.  But  faith  is  active  in  good 
works  and  evinced  by  obedience,  and  thus  ensures  a 
ready  and  joyful  compliance  with  all  other  Christian 
duties.  The  believer  accounts  it  a  high  privilege  to  show 
forth  and  strengthen  his  faith  by  celebrating  the  eucharist, 
and  in  the  exercise  of  the  same  faith,  he  esteems  it  no 
less  a  privilege  to  proclaim  and  ratify  the  membership  o  f 
his  infant  offspring,  and  seal  their  title  to  the  covenant 
of  grace  by  devoting  them  to  the  Triune  God  in  bap- 
tism. 


Eighth  Objection. — If  infants  are  members  of  the 
church  by  birth,  and  are  not  baptized,  they  forfeit  their 
membership,  and  hence,  on  the  Pedobaptist  principle,  all 
unbaptized  children  are  excluded  from  the  church  of 
God,  and  therefore  lost. 

Answer. — There  is  a  strange  admixture  of  truth  and 
error  in  this  statement.  The  major  and  minor  proposi- 
tions are  doubtless  correct,  but  the  last  branch  of  the 
7 


74  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

deduction  is  an  egregious  blunder.  It  is  true,  the  chil- 
dren of  Christian  parents  do  forfeit  their  membersliip  if 
they  grow  up  without  baptism ;  but  is  this  a  hard  case  ? 
— if  so,  it  may  be  easily  remedied,  for  M^e  are  now  speak- 
ing of  children,  the  neglect  of  whose  parents  is  volun- 
tary;  (hoAV  far  the  want  of  an  opportunity  to  present 
them  in  baptism,  may  operate  in  changing  the  relation  of 
unbaptized  children,  it  is  not  for  us  now  to  inquire.)  If 
however,  it  be  still  insisted, — that  the  doctrine  is  cruel  in 
relation  to  children,  who  must  be  regarded  as  innocent 
notwithstanding  the  remissness  of  the  parents ;  then  we 
refer  the  objector  to  the  God  of  Israel; — with  Him, — 
not  with  the  humble  writer,  let  the  contest  be  waged, 
if  an  impotent  worm  of  the  dust  can  be  found  sufficiently 
reckless  to  enter  into  conflict  with  the  Lord  God  of 
hosts ! — He  it  Avas  that  ordained  that  the  uncircumcised 
child  ^'■shoidd  he  cut  off  from  his  people  f  and  if  bap- 
tism has  been  substituted  for  circumcision,  which  can 
never  be  successfully  gainsayed,  then  it  follows  that 
unbaptized  children  are  "  rxit  off''  from  the  visible 
church,  and  whoever  desires  to  have  an  altercation  on  the 
question,  must  submit  to  have,  not  feeble  man,  but  the 
omnipotent  Jehovah  for  his  antagonist. 

But  here  the  query  arises :  what  is  meant  by  this  ct(t- 
ting  off  from  God's  people?  Does  it  imply  exclusion 
from  heaven  1 — God  forbid ! — it  imports  neither  more  nor 
less  than  a  shutting  out  from  external  church  privileges. 
The  individual  cut  off  from  the  people, — (that  is,  from 
the  Jewish  people  who  were  emphatically  God's  peo- 
ple,) had  no  right  to  partake  of  the  passover,  and  of 
some  other  religious  exercises,  but  if  he  died  in  infancy, 
would  be  received  into  heaven,  on  the  ground  of  Christ's 
merits,  just  as  certainly  as  the  unoflending  child  of  a 


OBJECTIONS.  75 

heathen.  Thus  also,  if  any  individual  in  a  Christian 
land  grows  up  to  adult  age  without  sealing  the  covenant 
of  grace  in  God's  own  appointed  way,  he  has  no  right  to 
celebrate  the  Lord's  supper,  nor  to  perform  other  acts  of 
membership  in  any  Pedobaptist  church,  so  long  as  he 
remains  unbaptized;  he  h  s  lost  his  membership;  his 
own  voluntary  neglect  ejects  him  from  God's  people. 

The  aspect  presented  by  the  denomination,  called 
"Friends,"  (who  reject  baptism  altogether  as  well  as  the 
holy  supper,)  in  this  view  of  our  subject,  is  a  peculiar 
one,  for  if  rigidly  carried  out  in  all  its  extended  bearings, 
it  will  in  a  sense  unchurch  them ;  but  whatever  be  the 
mistakes  of  men,  they  do  not  alter  the  truth  of  God. 
For  the  orthodox  portion  of  that  denomination,  we  enter- 
tain high  regard;  in  various  respects  they  are  an  amiable 
and  exemplary  people,  and  we  hope  a  goodly  proportion 
of  tliem  are  genuine  Christians.  How  far  their  want  of 
correct  apprehensions  of  baptism,  Avhich  is  the  founda- 
tion of  its  rejection  among  them,  will  tend  to  extenuate 
the  guilt  attaching  to  its  neglect,  does  not  belong  to  our 
province  to  investigate.  The  new  dispensation  is  con- 
fessedly more  spiritual  in  its  general  character  than  the 
old ;  in  some  respects  a  conformity  to  the  spirit  of  the 
gospel  may  apologize  for  the  omission  of  a  rigid  con- 
formity to  its  letter,  more  effectually  than  it  would  have 
done  under  the  inexorable  requisitions  of  the  law ;  but 
still  no  human  writer  is  to  be  held  responsible  for  the 
ixltimate  results  of  truth,  whithersoever  it  may  lead,  or 
whatever  want  of  charity  those  results  may  seem  to  indi- 
cate.    "  Let  God  be  true,  but  every  man  a  liar." 


CHAPTER  VII. 

THIRD    ARGUMENT. 

TVe  find  numerous  passages  in  the  Sacred  Scrip- 
tures, lohich  cannot  be  consistently  explained  witJwut 
admitting  the  right  of  infants  to  baptism. — As  a  consid- 
eration of  all  those  passages  would  carry  us  far  beyond  our 
prescribed  limits,  we  must  be  content  with  a  brief  refer- 
ence to  a  few  of  them. 

1.  "Then  were  brought  unto  him  little  children,  that 
he  should  put  his  hands  on  them,  and  pray  :  but  the  dis- 
ciples rebuked  them.  But  Jesus  said,  suffer  little  chil- 
dren, and  forbid  them  not,  to  come  unto  me ;  for  of  such 
is  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  And  he  laid  his  hands  on 
them  and  departed  thence."'  Observe  here,  that  the 
children  spoken  of  were  ^^  little  children;^''  according  to 
Mark  x.  16,  they  were  so  young  that  our  Saviour  "took 
them  up  in  his  arms,"  and  in  Luke  xviii.  15,  they  are 
expressly  called  "  infants."^  They  must  accordingly 
have  been  children  not  only  in  temper,  docility,  &;c.,  but 
also  and  emphatically  in  age  and  stature. — Notice  next, 
that  our  Lord  positively  affirms  respecting  them,  that, 
"  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven;''''  that  is,  of  such 
little   children  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven, — to  them   it 

^Matt.  xix.  13—16. 

-Tot  fi^KpH — very  young  children,  and  tliis  was  probably  the  reason 
that  the  disciples  rebuked  the  parents,  thinking  them  too  young  to 
receive  any  good. 


THIRD   ARGUMENT.  77 

belongs,  or  theirs  this  kingdom  is.  "It  is  well  known," 
says  Professor  Schmucker,  "  to  those  acquainted  with 
the  phraseology  of  the  New  Testament,  that  the  expres- 
sions 'kingdom  of  God'  and  'kingdom  of  heaven'  are 
familiarly  used  to  designate  the  church  of  God  under  the 
New  Testament  economy.  Thus,  John  the  Baptist 
preached,  saying,  Repent  ye,  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
is  at  hand.  It  will  not  be  supposed  that  heaven  was  lit- 
erally descending  to  the  earth  and  had  almost  arrived 
amongst  us;  but  the  Saviour  evidently  meant,  that  the 
time  for  remodeling  his  church  into  its  New  Testament 
form  was  at  hand."  Robert  Hall,  a  distinguished  and 
learned  Baptist  minister,  explains  this  phrase  in  the  same 
manner,  his  words  are:  "The  kingdom  of  God,  a  phrase 
which  is  constantly  employed  in  Scripture,  to  denote 
that  state  of  things  which  is  placed  under  the  avowed 
administration  of  the  3Iessiah.'"^ — K  then  the  expres- 
sion, "kingdom  of  heaven,"  signifies  the  visible  church 
of  God,  as  distinguished  both  from  the  heathen  world 
and  tlie  old  economy,  and  this  church,  as  Christ  declares, 
is  composed  in  part  of  "  little  children,"  or  embraces 
them  as  members,  then  of  course  they  are  entitled  to  bap- 
tism as  the  sign  of  their  membership. 

In  order  to  escape  the  force  of  this  argument,  Anti- 
pedobaptists  maintain,  that  the  words,  "of  such,"  desig- 
nate not  little  children,  but  adults  who  resemble  them  in 
spirit.  But  why,  in  this  event,  did  Christ  wish  little 
children  to  be  brought  to  him  ?  Could  he  not  have  taught 
without  their  presence,  that  adults  of  a  child-like  dispo- 
sition were  the  subjects  of  his  kingdom?  According  to 
this  exposition  our  Lord's  language,  paraphrased,  would 
be  to  tills  efi'ect:  Suffer  little  children  to  come  unto  me, 

•See  Hall's  Works,  vol.  1.  p.  372. 

17* 


'78  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

for  my  kingdom  belongs  not  to  them,  but  only  to  adult 
persons  who  resemble  them  in  spirit. — It  would  not  have 
been  more  preposterous  for  him  to  say:  suffer  doves  and 
lambs  to  come  unto  me,  for  my  kingdom  consists  not  of 
them  but  of  adults  of  clove-like  and  lamb-like  temper. 
Such  absurdity  is  its  own  refutation.  The  inconsistency 
of  this  gloss  will  be  made  still  more  apparent,  by  refer- 
ring to  parallel  language  in  other  parts  of  Scripture. 
"Blessed,"  says  our  Lord,  "are  the  meek:  for  they 
shall  inherit  the  earth.  Blessed  are  they  which  are  per- 
secuted for  righteousness'  sake:  for  theirs  is  the  king- 
dom of  heaven.'"  The  form  of  expression  here  is  pre- 
cisely the  same  in  the  Greek,  as  that  under  consideration. 
We  might  therefore  with  equal  propriety  expound  these 
texts  thus :  the  kingdom  of  heaven  does  not  belong  to 
those  who  are  "  poor  in  spirit,"  but  only  those  who 
resemble  them ;  it  does  not  belong  to  those  who  are 
"  persecuted  for  righteousness'  sake,"  but  only  those 
who  are  like  them  in  temper.  Who  does  not  see  the 
folly  and  Avickedness  of  thus  trifling  with  inspired  truth? 
But  we  are  sometimes  told  that  the  expression,  "king- 
dom of  heaven,"  implies  the  kingdom  of  glory,  or  a 
heavenly  state  ; — suppose  it  does, — our  argument  is  only 
strengthened  by  this  construction,  for  if  our  little  chil- 
dren belong  to  the  kingdom  of  glory,  much  more  do  they 
belong  to  God's  kingdom  on  earth;  and  if  so,  why  not 
administer  to  them  the  appointed  seal  of  that  interesting 
relation?  If  they  have  the  thing  signified,  which  is  mem 
bership  in  the  church,  why  withhold  the  sign  of  it,  which 
is  baptism  ? — After  all,  it  will  perhaps  be  asserted,  that 
those  children  were  brought,  not  that  Christ  should  bap- 
tize them,  but  heal  them  of  diseases.     We  are,  however 

'Matt.  v.  3—10. 


THIRD   ARGUMENT.  79 

not  left  to  conjecture  Avhat  was  the  motive,  for  we  are 
plainly"  told,  that  it  was  that  our  Lord  might  bestow  his 
blessing  upon  them ;  accordingly  the  sacred  Avriter  in- 
forms us,  that  "  he  put  his  hands  upon  them  and  blessed 
them."  Whether  he  baptized  them  or  not,  is  a  matter 
perfectly  immaterial  to  the  validity  of  our  argument.  It 
is  sufficient  for  our  purpose  to  know,  that  little  children 
belong  to  God's  church  and  therefore  have  a  right  to  its 
privileges. 

2.  "Then  Peter  said  unto  them,  repent,  and  be  baptized, 
every  one  of  you.  *  *  *  For  the  promise  is  unto 
you,  and  to  your  children,  and  to  all  that  are  afar  off,'" 
&.C.  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  the  apostle  here  uses 
the  definite  article  the, — not  a  but  "  the  promise,"  that 
is,  the  promise  of  God  to  Abraham,  "  to  be  a  God  unto 
thee  and  unto  thy  seed  after  thee,^''  is  equally  "  unto 
you  and  to  your  children.'"  Now  in  order  to  decide 
what  Peter  meant  by  the  expression,  "your  children," 
it  is  only  necessary  to  ascertain  the  import  of  the  words 
"  thy  seed"  in  the  promise  referred  to.  It  is  universally 
admitted  and  has  never  been  denied,  that  the  latter  com- 
prises small  children  "  eight  days  old,"  and  hence  it  fol- 
lows Avith  all  the  clearness  and  certainty  of  a  mathemati- 
cal demonstration,  that  the  former  embraces  the  same 
description  of  individuals.  Every  one  knows  that  the 
word  seed  means  children ;  and  that  children  means 
seed  ;  and  that  they  are  precisely  the  same.  The  pro- 
mise then,  in  which  God  engages  to  be  our  God  and  to 
constitute  us  his  people,  extends  equally  to  our  children, 
and  of  course  gives  them  as  well  as  us,  a  right  to  the 
privileges  of  his  people.  And  if  they  have  a  right  to 
tliose  privileges,  what  further  argument  need  we  to  show 

'Acts  ii.  38—39. 


80  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

that  they  are  entitled  to  the  outward  token  and  seal  of 
those  privileges  ? 

It  will  avail  nothing  here  to  inform  us,  that  T-exva,  chil- 
dren, means  posterity  ; — suppose  it  does, — s-^spa'.*,  seed, 
ako  means  poHterity,  but  both  include  our  earliest  as 
well  as  our  latent  posterity,  our  youngest  children  as 
well  as  our  most  distant  successors.  Admitting  that  the 
word  children  does  not  always  signify  infants  ;  the  ques- 
tion is  whether  it  can  mean  any  thing  else  but  infants  in 
this  passage  ?  Peter  speaks  to  all  who  were  capable  of 
understanding  him,  'I'hese  he  calls  you.  Now,  whom 
can  he  possibly  mean  by  the  children  of  these  hearers 
but  the  infant  offspring  which  they  either  had  or  might 
have  ?  And  if  the  promise  to  the  adults  be  a  reason  for 
submitting  U)  be  baptized,  it  must  also  be  a  reason  for 
baptizing  the  children  ;  since  the  promise  is  said  to  be 
equally  to  both ;  and  this  is  made  the  foundation  of  their 
baptism.  Our  Baptist  brethren  would  make  Peter  a 
weak  rea-soner  indeed.  According  to  them  he  says  to 
h'lH  audience,  "  The  promise  is  to  you,"  therefore  be 
ye  baptized  :  the  promise  is  also  to  your  little  ones* 
therefore  let  them  not  be  baptized  ? — Spirit  of  party  ! 
what  havoc  hast  thou  made  of  the  Holy  Scriptures ! 
But  that  our  tenderest  offspring  are  included  is  even 
evident  from  the  grammatical  construction  ;  for  the  apos- 
tle says  :  the  promise  is  to  you,  and  your  children,  not 
is  to  you,  and  vrill  be  to  your  children  when  they  reach 
manhood  ;  but  is  even  now  to  you  parents  and  your 
little  ones,  &,c.  Eilv)ards,  (;ornmcnting  on  this  pas- 
sage, remarks  :  "  We  should  more  certainly  come  at 
the  truth,  if  instead  of  idly  criticising,  we  could  fancy 
ourselves  Jews,  and  in  the  habit  of  circumcising  iil- 
fanUJ,  and  receiving   them   into   the  church;   and  then 


THIRD    AROrMF.NT.  SI 

icoulil  wo  imniiiuo  ono  of  our  own  nation  and  rrlii^ion  to 
address  us  in  the  very  huiguagc  ol"  Poior.  in  the  text, 
'  tJie  promise  is  to  you  aitd  to  your  children :'  Un  us 
ask  ourselves  whether  we  eoukl  ever  suppose  him  to 
mean  aduU  posterity  only  !"' 

3.  "  The  unhelievino-  hushand  is  sanetitied  hy  tlie 
"wife,  and  the  unbelieviuo-  wite  is  sanetitied  hy  the  l\us- 
bai\d ;  else  were  your  ehihlren  unelean  ;  but  now  are 
tJiey  holy.""  The  apostle  is  speakiuij  ol"  a  mixed  nuir- 
riage,  in  whieh  one  of  the  parties  is  a  heathen  and  the 
oUier  a  professing  Christian.  In  what  light  are  the  otV- 
spring  of  this  eonneetion  to  he  regardeil  ; — as  hohj  or  as 
t(nclciv).  that  is.  as  members  oi'  the  ehureh  or  as  heathen  ? 
He  deeides  that  they  are  members  ;  tor  says  he,  the  un- 
believing husbaiul  is  sanetitied  by  the  believing  wife, 
ami  vice  versa,  that  is,  the  one  is  so  purilied  by  means 
of  his  relaiion  to  ilie  other,  that  their  mutual  otVspring 
are  not  KnclcuiK — not  heathen — but  Iioli/. — that  is,  sepa- 
rated from  the  gentile  world  and  in  eovetiant  with  (lod, 
or  nuMubers  ol'  that  ehureh  w'uh  whieh  ilie  believing 
parent  is.  in  virtue  of  his  protession.  united,  lint  if  both 
parents  were  imbelievers  or  pagans,  then  their  ehihlren 
would  be  imchut)!.  that  is.  they  eould  not  be  regarded  as 
inehided  in  the  eovenant  of  grace,  and  belonging  to  the 
visible  ehureh  of  Cod.  It  will  be  noticed,  that  '' holi/" 
and  •'  unclean"  are  here  converse  terms. 

After  this  exposition,  we  iuhhI  scarcely  remind  the  in- 
telligent ivailer,  that  the  worils  sanctijied  and  //()///  in  the 
above  text,  are  eniplovt\l.  not  in  a  spiritual,  but  in  ;ui 
eccldtiastica/  sense,  ami  ilesignate  something  set  apart 
to  a  holy  or  sacreil  tise,  that  is.  separated  from  a  eom- 
mon  or  profaiu\  to  a   holy  purpose.     Thus,   the  .Tews 

'Ethvanls  on  l>ai>lisin.  -1  Cor.  vii.  It. 


82  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

were  called  a  "  holy  people,"  the  "  people  of  God," 
&c.,  not  because  they  were  all  or  even  a  majority  of  them 
spiritually  holy,  and  really  united  in  heart  to  God,  but 
because  they  were  separated  from  the  rest  of  the  world 
by  God's  covenant  with  them,  and  constituted  his  pro- 
fessing people.  In  the  same  sense  the  Christian  Avorld 
may  be  regarded  as  holy,  or  as  GocVs  people,  because 
severed  from  the  heathen,  and  professing  his  name.  So 
the  Lord's  day  is  holy,  being  set  apart  from  a  common 
to  a  religious  use  ;  so  the  vessels  of  the  temple,  the  vest- 
ments of  the  high-priest,  &c,,  were  holy.  To  maintain 
on  the  strength  of  this  passage,  that  a  very  pious  luis- 
band  or  wife  is  always  instrumental  in  conferring  on  an 
unbelieving  partner,  spiritual  purity  or  sanctification  of 
heart ;  or  that  every  child  born  of  parents  of  whom  one 
is  a  believer,  will  necessarily  become  the  subject  of  gos- 
pel holiness  ;  would  be  to  assert  that  which  history  and 
experience  but  too  often  and  too  sadly  contradict.  The 
opinion  that  this  text  decides  a  question  of  legitimacy 
respecting  children  born  from  mixed  marriages,  and  that 
agreeably  to  this  decision,  the  offspring  of  parents,  one 
of  whom  is  pious,  are  no  longer  bastards,  but  to  be  con- 
sidered as  begotten  in  lawful  Avedlock  ;  is  such  a  wild 
and  far-fetched  fancy,  that  we  cannot  ^stop  to  notice  it, 
except  with  this  single  remark,  that  the  word  "  holy" 
is  no  where  in  the  Bible  applied  to  legitimacy  of  birth. 
And  as  to  the  idea  that  piety  in  one  party  is  necessary  to 
render  a  marriage  contract  valid ;  it  is  too  ridiculous  to 
deserve  confutation. 

Should  it  be  contended  that  our  exposition  of  this 
passage  proves  too  much  for  our  purpose,  since  if  the 
children  are  "  holy,"  or  members  of  the  church  because 
either  of  the  parents  is  a  believer,  then  also  the  belief  of 


THIRD    ARGUMENT.  83 

one  parent  makes  the  other  "  holy"  or  a  member  of  the 
church,  even  while  he  or  she  still  remains  a  heathen, 
("unclean,")  because  it  is  plainly  said,  that  "the  unbe- 
lieving husband  is  sanctified  by  the  wife,"  and  vice 
versa; — our  reply  is,  that  however  ingenious  this  objec- 
tion is,  it  has  no  foundation  in  truth.  Its  fallacy  lies  in 
the  idea  that  the  sanciification  of  the  unbelieving  hus- 
band (by  his  alliance  with  a  believing  wife)  is  in  every 
respect  precisely  the  same  with  the  holiness,  which  chil- 
dren derive  from  their  descent  from  a  believing  parent. 
But  this  supposition  is  altogether  gratuitous.  We  indeed 
readily  grant,  that  the  believing  wife  does,  in  some  sense, 
sanctify  the  unbelieving  husband,  but  by  no  means  to  an 
extent  sufficient  to  confer  upon  him  the  right  of  church- 
membership  ;  for  this  would  be  a  gross  violation  of  the 
covenant,  and  could  therefore  never  have  been  intended 
by  the  apostle.  But  the  membership  of  infants,  on  ac- 
count of  the  faith  of  any  one  of  the  parents,  would  be 
no  such  violation,  but  in  perfect  accordance  with  the 
covenant,  and  is  therefore  not  only  admissible,  but  an 
absolute  corollary.  The  language  of  the  passage  itself 
suggests  this  explanation;  for  the  sanctification  spoken 
of,  is  imputed  to  the  unbelieving  parent,  evidently  not  on 
his  own  account,  but  for  the  sake  of  the  offspring,  or  in 
other  words,  not  with  the  view  to  constitute  him  a  mem- 
ber, but  to  transmit  membership  to  the  children  of  a 
believing  parent.  This  construction,  as  already  inti- 
mated, is  perfectly  consistent  with  the  original  terms  of 
the  covenant.  According  to  those  terms,  church-mem- 
bership was  the  invariable  birthright  of  the  children  of 
God's  people,  but  in  no  event  was  it  based  upon  the  mere 
fact  of  intermarriage  with  that  people ;  nay  more,  adults 
conld  not  under  any  circumstances  become  members 
without  a  profession  of  their  faith.     Who  then  must  not 


8^  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

perceive,  that  the  "  sanctificalion  of  the  unbelieving  by 
the  believing  parent,  and  the  external  or  ecclesiastical 
"holiness"  of  the  children,  conferred  by  the  same  cause, 
are  two  distinct  things,  and  that,  to  understand  them  as 
implying  the  same,  would  involve  a  contravention  of  the 
stipulations  of  the  covenant? 

"  The  passage  thus  explained,"  says  an  able  writer, 
"  establishes  the  church-membership  of  infants  in  another 
form.  For  it  assumes  the  principle  that  when  both  pa- 
rents are  reputed  believers ;  their  children  belong  to  the 
church  of  God  as  a  matter  of  course.  The  Avhole  dif- 
ficulty proposed  by  the  Corinthians  to  Paul,  grows  out 
of  this  principle.  Had  he  taught,  or  they  understood, 
that  no  children,  be  their  parents  believers  or  unbelievers, 
are  to  be  accounted  members  of  the  church,  the  difficulty 
could  not  have  existed.  For  if  the  faith  of  both  parents 
could  not  confer  upon  a  child  the  privilege  of  member- 
ship, the  faith  of  only  one  of  them  certainly  could  not. 
The  point  was  decided.  It  would  have  been  mere  im- 
pertinence to  teaze  the  apostle  with  queries  which  carried 
their  own  answer  along  with  them.  But  on  the  suppo- 
sition that  when  both  parents  were  members,  their  chil- 
dren, also,  were  members ;  the  difficulty  is  very  natural 
and  serious.  '  I  see,'  would  a  Corinthian  convert  exclaim, 
'  I  see  the  children  of  my  Christian  neighbors,  owned 
as  members  of  the  church  of  God ;  and  I  see  the  children 
of  others,  who  are  unbelievers,  rejected  with  themselves. 
I  believe  in  Christ  myself;  but  my  husband,  my  Avife, 
believes  not.  What  is  to  become  of  my  children?  Are 
they  to  be  admitted  with  myself?  or  are  they  to  be  cast 
off  with  my  partner  ?' 

"  '  Let  not  your  heart  be  troubled,'  replies  the  apostle: 
«  God  reckons  them  to  the  believing,  not  to  the  unbe- 
lieving, parent.     It  is  enough  that  they  are  yours.     The 


THIRD   ARGUMENT.  85 

infidelity  of  your  partner  shall  never  frustrate  their  inte- 
rest in  the  covenant  of  your  God.  They  are  '  holy' 
because  you  are  so. 

"  This  decision  put  the  subject  at  rest.  And  it  lets 
us  know  that  one  of  the  reasons,  if  not  the  chief  rea- 
son of  the  doubt,  whether  a  married  person  should  con- 
tinue, after  conversion,  in  the  conjugal  society  of  an  infi- 
del partner,  arose  from  a  fear  lest  such  continuance  should 
exclude  the  children  from  the  church  of  God.  Other- 
wise it  is  hard  to  comprehend  why  the  apostle  should 
dissuade  them  from  separating,  by  such  an  argument  as 
he  has  employed  in  the  text.  And  it  is  utterly  incon- 
ceivable how  such  a  doubt  could  have  entered  their  minds, 
had  not  the  membership  of  infants,  born  of  believing 
parents,  been  undisputed,  and  esteemed  a  high  privilege ; 
so  high  a  privilege,  as  that  the  apprehension  of  losing  it 
made  conscientious  parents  at  a  stand  whether  they  ought 
not  rather  to  break  the  ties  of  wedlock,  by  withdrawing 
from  an  unbelieving  husband  or  wife.  Thus,  the  origin 
of  this  difiiculty  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  solution  of  it, 
on  the  other,  concur  in  establishing  our  doctrine,  that,  by 
the  appointment  of  God  himself,  the  infants  of  believing 
parents  are  born  members  of  his  church.''^^ 

'Essays  on  the  Church  of  God,  by  Dr.  J.  M.  Mason.  Christiaii's 
Magazine,  ii.  49,  50. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

FOURTH    ARGTJMENT. 

Tlie  ancient  practice  of  family  baptism,  which  was 
continued  in  the  apostolic  age  affords  very  strong  pre- 
sumptive evidence  on  this  subject. 

That  this  practice  prevailed  under  the  Old  Testament 
economy,  that  is,  that  gentile  parents  when  they  re- 
nounced idolatiy  and  professed  the  true  religion,  were 
with  all  the  members  of  their  families,  including  the 
youngest  children,  baptized  and  circumcised  in  token  of 
their  ablution  from  heathenism  and  their  title  to  the  bless- 
ings of  the  Abrahamic  covenant,  is  a  historical  fact  already 
sufficiently  proved.'  The  children  were  uniformly  em- 
braced in  this  solemn  transaction,  on  the  profession  of  faith 
made  by  their  parents.  This  interesting  practice  (with 
the  exception  of  circumcision)  was  not  set  aside,  but  con- 
tinued in  the  apostolic  age.  We  have  no  doubt  that  hun- 
dreds of  families,  the  heads  of  which  were  converted  by 
the  preaching  of  the  gospel,  were  baptized,  embracing 
thousands  of  infants.  The  very  language  in  which  the 
baptism  of  families  is  mentioned  in  the  New  Testament, 
affords  proof  that  such  instances  were  of  frequent  occur- 
rence, and  constituted  a  standing  practice.  Witness,  for 
example,  the  case  of  Lydia:  "And  when  she  was  bap- 
tized, and  her  household,  she  besought  us,"  &c.  It  is 
obvious  to  the  plainest  reader,  that  the  baptism  of  "her 
household,"  is  recorded  not  as  an  uncommon  event,  but  as 

'See  p.  20  sqq. 


FOURTH   ARGUMENT  87 

a  natural  and  very  ordinary  one,  following  her  own  profes- 
sion of  faith  as  a  matter  of  course.  The  language  of 
Clemens  Alexandrinus,  A.  D.  190,  is  in  perfect  accord- 
ance with  this  fact:  "The  doctrine  of  the  Master  of 
Christianity  did  not  remain  confined  to  Judea,  only,  as 
the  philosophy  of  the  Greeks  was  confined  to  Greece; 
but  it  spread  itself  over  the  whole  world  converting 
equally  Greek  and  barbarian,  in  every  nation  and  vil- 
lage, and  in  all  cities  entire  families  (literally  whole 
households)  and  separate  individuals.'" 

Most  writers  on  this  subject,  refer  only  to  three  cases 
of  family  baptism,  recorded  in  the  New  Testament;  viz. 
those  of  Lydia,  the  jailor  and  Stephanas.     But  an  atten- 
tive examination  will  justify  the  assertion,  that  there  were 
many  more.     The  church  at  Philippi,  though  evidently 
small,  certainly  furnishes  two  cases,  that  of  Lydia  and 
that  of  the  jailor  ;2  how  many  others  were  baptized  as 
families,  we  cannot  say.     The  church  at  Corinth  also 
affords  two  baptized  families,  that  of  Crispus  and  that  of 
Stephanas  ;=»  besides  a  number  of  others,  plainly  glanced 
at  but  not  expressly  mentioned.     The  family  of  Crispus 
is  not  positively  declared  to  have  been  baptized,  but  its 
baptism  will  no  doubt  be  readily  conceded,  being  recorded 
as  a  believing  family ;  and  to  have  left  this  believing  family 
nnbaptized,  would,  on  the  one  hand,  have  been  a°strange 
and  unaccountable  neglect  on  the  part  of  the  apostles  to 
fulfil  their  divine  commission,  (which  involved  the  duty 
of  baptizing  all  who  should  believe,)  while  on  the  other 
hand,  it  would  cut  up  by  the  very  roots  the  baptism  of 
believing  adults  no  less  than  that  of  infants.     We  wil- 

'0;x(jy;  oxs?,  km  tJix.  acjtfrov.— Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  lib.  vi.  p.  827. 
*Acts.  xvi.  15,  and  xvi.  33. 
'Acts,  xviii.  8,  and  1  Cor.  i.  16. 


88  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

lingly  leave  our  Baptist  brethren  to  decide  according  to 
their  own  judgment;  if  they  maintain  that  "Crispus 
with  all  his  house,"  though  said  to  be  a  "believing  fam- 
ily," were  not  baptized,  they  virtually  impute  to  the 
apostles  a  most  flagrant  disregard  of  the  plainest  duty, 
and  uproot  their  own  favorite  scheme;  but  if  they  say 
they  were  baptized,  then  they  admit  inferentially  what  is 
not  expressly  on  record,  and  vastly  strengthen  the  pre- 
sumption in  favor  of  infant  baptism,  as  will  presently  be 
shown.  They  can  choose  whichever  horn  of  the  dilem- 
ma they  please. 

But  if  they  grant  the  baptism  of  the  family  of  Cris- 
pus, because  we  find  it  reported  as  believing,  then  en- 
sues another  inference  no  less  certain  and  still  more  fatal 
to  the  Baptist  cause,  namely,  we  must  admit  the  same  of 
all  other  families  which  we  find  marked  as  Christian, 
but  not  described  as  baptized.  Such  were  the  families 
of  Onesiphorus,'  Aristobulus,^  Narcissus,^  Aquila  and 
Priscilla,^  Nymphas,"  and  Philemon.*  It  is  true  that  in 
the  case  of  Aristobulus  and  that  of  Narcissus,  the  Avord 
oiicos,  family,  does  not  occur,  yet  the  phrase  evidently 
implies  family,  and  all  translators  have  so  rendered  it.* 
In  order  to  present  this  subject  more  satisfactorily  to  our 
readers,  we  shall  lay  before  them  a  tabular  view  of  it. 

12  Tim.  i.  16—18,  and  iv.  19.  "Rom.  xvi.  10—11. 

'Rom.  xvi.  3—5.  "Col.  iv.  15.  ^^Phil.  i.  2. 

"It  is  worthy  of  remark,  that  the  apostle  does  not  greet  Aristobu- 
lus and  Narcissus,  but  only  those  of  their  households  or  families — 
from  which  Clarke  infers,  that  either  they  were  dead  or  were  not 
converted  to  Christianity,  and  hence  he  limits  his  salutations  to 
their  families. 


FOrRTH  ARGUMENT.  89 

CHRISTIAN  FAMILIES  MENTIONED  IN  THE  SACRED 
WRITINGS. 

I.  Families  expressly  stated  to  have  been  baptized: 

1.  That  of  Cornelius,  Acts  x.  1 — 48,  and  xi.  14. 

2.  Lydia,  Acts  xvi.  15. 

3.  the  jailor,  Acts  xvi.  33. 

4.  Stephanas,  1  Cor.  i.  16. 

II.  Families  not  expressly  stated  to  have  been  bap- 
tized :' 

5.  That  of  Aquila  and  Priscilla,  Rom.  xvi.  3 — 5. 

6.  Nymphas,  Col.  iv.  15. 

7.  Philemon,  Phil.  i.  2. 

8.  Crispus,  Acts  xviii.  8. 

9.  Onesiphorus,  2  Tim.  i.  16 — 18,  and  iv.  19. 

III.  Families  not  expressly  represented  as  families 
nor  as  having  received  baptism. 

10.  That  of  Aristobiilus,  Rom.  xvi.  10 — 11. 

11.  Narcissus,  ibid. 

Now  then,  we  have  fairly  made  out  no  less  than 
eleven  believing  families  ;  four  of  them  explicitly  af- 
firmed to  have  been  baptized  ;  five  spoken  of  in  the 
capacity  of  families,  and  as  having  embraced  the  gospel ; 
and  the  remaining  tivo  also  alluded  to  as  believing  fami- 
lies, but  not  literally  so  represented.  The  last  seven 
either  received  baptism  or  they  did  not ;  if  not,  the  apos- 
tles, as  already  intimated,  stand  chargeable  with  a  palpa- 

'We  might  liave  increased  this  number  by  adding  the  family  of  the 
nobleman  at  Capernaum,  see  Jolin  iv.  53  ;  but  as  Christian  baptism 
was  not  then  appointed,  we  have  omitted  it,  though  no  doubt  he  and 
all  his  family  received  baptism  as  soon  as  it  was  instituted. 


90  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

ble  dereliction  of  official  duty,  in  not  administering  it  to 
them,  and  "believer's  baptism,"  so  called,  as  far  as  these 
examples  go,  is  torn  to  shreds  and  cast  to  the  winds. 
But  if  they  did  receive  baptism,  of  which  in  our  opinion 
there  cannot  be  the  shadoAV  of  a  doubt,  then  let  us  give 
to  this  argument  just  as  much  weight  as  it  deserves. 

Have  we  eleven  instances  of  the  administration  of  the 
Lord's  supper  ? — not  a  fourth  of  that  number.  Have  we 
eleven  instances  of  the  change  of  the  Jewish  Sabbath  to 
the  Lord's  day  ? — not  a  fifth  of  that  number.  In  fact, 
there  is  not  a  single  doctrine,  principle  or  practice,  de- 
rived from  the  example  of  the  apostles,  which  can  be 
supported  by  a  more  numerous  series  of  clear  and  de- 
cided precedents.  How  then  can  our  Baptist  neighbors, 
in  the  face  of  all  these  examples,  deny  infant  baptism  ? 
Is  there  any  other  case,  besides  this,  in  which  they  would 
take  eleven  families  promiscuously  and  deny  the  exist- 
ence of  young  children  in  them  ?  Take  eleven  families 
indiscriminately  in  Charles  street,  or  any  other  street  in 
Baltimore  : — take  eleven  pews  in  any  house  of  worship, 
containing  eleven  families  : — take  eleven  family-groups 
at  a  zoological  exhibition  or  a  public  concert,  and  in 
every  instance  they  will  afford  more  than  one  child. 
The  estimated  average  of  children  in  each  family,  may 
be  fairly  set  down  at  six  ;  these  six  in  each  one  of  those 
families,  amount  to  sixty-six ;  now  it  is  more  than  ten 
hundred  thousand  times  to  one,  that  among  sixty-six 
children,  there  will  be  at  least  one  infant.  But  absolute 
infancy  is  not  necessary  to  make  out  our  point ;'  sup- 
pose children  of  two  or  three  years  old,  and  the  chances 
will  be  many  millions  to  one  that  some  infants  were 

'The  Greek  church  extends  baptismal  infancy  to  three  years  or  to 
four ;  the  Romish  church  to  seven  years. 


FOURTH   ARGUMENT.  91 

found  among  the  sixty-six  children  belonging  to  eleven 
families.  Or  put  the  question  in  another  form  :  suppose 
eleven  families,  each  containing  six  children, — how  many 
young  children  would  probably  be  found  among  them  ? 

In  order  to  invest  this  argument  with  still  more  force, 
we  must  be  permitted  to  indulge  in  a  criticism  on  the 
meaning  of  the  word  fa7nili/.  The  Greek  term  "moc,  cor- 
responds precisely  with  the  word  house  in  English ; 
both  are  variously  used  to  express  the  same  ideas.  Our 
object  now,  is  not  to  analyze  all  the  numerous  applica- 
tions of  this  term,  (^'^^sr,)  but  merely  to  ascertain  its  im- 
port in  reference  to  family  baptism.  House  or  oikos 
then,  signifies,  metaphorically,  ^family  living  contempo- 
raneously and  mostly  under  the  same  roof.'  With  the 
addition  of  a  syllable  and  a  change  of  the  termination  to 
the  feminine  gender,  o«<a,  it  also  changes  its  application, 
and  comprehends  attendants  on  a  family,  servants,  &c.* 
While  the  former  therefore  answers  to  the  word  house 
ov family,  the  latter  conveys  the  idea  of  \\o\xs,ehold, — in- 
cluding all  that  hold  to  the  house.  Strictly  speaking, 
there  is  not  a  single  instance  on  inspired  record  of  the 
baptism  of  an  entire  howsehold,  as  such,  though  individ- 
uals comprising  it  may  have  been  baptized  as  individuals. 
We  are  therefore  narrowed  down  in  this  investigation  to 
the  Greek  term  owe?,  in  the  sense  of  family,  and  with 

'Scripture  regularly  employs  this  term  (family)  to  import  the 
nearest  possible  degree  of  kindred  ; — by  consanguinity  generally ; 
yet  not  excluding  marriage,  &c.  ;  and  by  descent  generally,  but  we 
do  not  know  a  passage  in  which  it  includes  servants,  or  the  house- 

HOLD. 

^  Marriage  indeed,  or  adoption,  might  engraft  an  mdividual  of  the 
AowseiiOLD  into  the  familij ;  but  even  that  is  not  according  to  the 
appointment  of  nature,  but  is  an  unexpected  incident. 


92  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

this  word  it  perfectly  corresponds,  and  should  always 
have  been  so  rendered  when  used  in  relation  to  family 
baptism.     Such  a  translation  would  have  prevented  all 
error  on  the  subject  of  baptism.     There  can,  correctly 
speaking,  be  no  family  Avithout  children.     A  man  and 
his  wife  do  not  constitute  a  family,  any  more  than  a  sin- 
gle old  gentleman  who  dwells  under  the  same  roof  with 
his  maiden  sister.     When  a  woman  is  in  a  state  of  gravi- 
dation,  she  is  said  to  be  "  in  a  family -way.,''''  and  when 
she  gives  birth  to  her  child,  she  has  a  family.     This  criti- 
cism applies  exactly  to  the  Greek  word  omo^.     No  where 
in  the  New  Testament,  does  it  mean  a  married  pair  with- 
out children,  (of  course  we  here  allude  to  the  term  in  its 
metaphorical  sense,  as  applying  to  persons,  and  not  a 
place  of  residence,)  but  in  several  instances  it  imports 
children  distinct  from  their  parents.     For  example,  the 
apostle  salutes  the  families  of  Onesiphonis,  of  Aristobu- 
lus,  and  of  Narcissus,  but  not  the  heads  of  these  fami- 
lies ;  and  he  further  tells  us  that  he  baptized  the  family 
of  Stephanas,  but  he  did  not  baptize  Stephanas  himself. 
Here  then  we  find  the  word  owoc  (house  or  family)  em- 
ployed to  denote  the  children  even  to  the  exclusion  of 
the  parents.     Again,  Noah  was  saved  with  his  family 
by  means  of  the  ark.     The  family  saved,  comprehended 
Noah  with  his  wife,  and  his  three  sons  with  their  wives. 
Now  the  writer  to  the  Hebrews,  states  that  Noah  "  pre- 
pared an  ark  to  the  saving  of  his  (cwoc)  house'"  or  family. 
This  case  points  out  to  us  with  sufficient  plainness  the 
meaning  of  house  or  family. 

But  as  in  the  example  just  cited,  the  children  com- 
posing the  family,  were  all  adults ;  we  proceed  to  show 
that  this  word  also  denotes  small  children. 

>Heb.  xi.  7. 


FOURTH   ARGUMENT.  93 

"  The  apostle,  describing  the  qualifications  for  a  Chris- 
tian bishop,*  insists  that  he  should  be  '  one  who  ruletii 
well  HIS  own  yamiVy,  having  his  chihlren  in  subjection 
with  all  gravity — (for  if  any  man  know  not  how  to  rule 
his  own  family,  how  shall  he  take  care  of  the  church  of 
God?')  Here  it  is  evident,  the  children  are  ihe  family ; 
and  that  they  are  in  a  state  of  non-age,  pupilage,  and 
youth,  such  as  requires  parental  ruling  and  guiding. 

"  Continuing  our  perusal  of  the  same  chapter,  we  find  a 
precept  which  directs  a  deacon  to  'be  the  husband  of 
one  wife,  ruling  well  his  children,  even  his  own  fam- 
ily'"— his  nearest  of  kin — his  issue.  Lest  this  should 
admit  the  possibility  of  equivocation,  the  apostle  expressly 
marks  the  family  as  his  own.  Nothing  can  be  more  a 
man's  oivn  than  his  children ;  and  the  force  of  the  Greek 
term  warrants  any  degree  of  strength  that  can  be  annexed 
to  it :  it  therefore,  in  both  these  places  and  connections, 
fixes  the  parties  designed  by  it,  (equally  in  reference  to 
the  bishop,  as  to  the  deacon)  to  natural  issue,  i.  e.  a 
family.  Nor  can  these  children  be  adults,  for  the  same 
reasons  why  the  bishop's  children  could  not  be  adults. 

"But,  these  children  being  under  the  rule  of  their  father, 
though  young,  are  someivhat  advanced  in  life.  In  proof 
that  the  term  family  imports  babes  and  sucklings,  con- 
sult the  advice  of  the  apostle  to  the  young  women,  in  a 
following  chapter.  '  I  would  have  the  young  widows 
to^l.  marry — 2.  bear  children — 3.  guide  their  ofTspring ; 
literally,  despotise  their  family.''^  Most  certainly  this 
order  of  the  words  is  definite;  'marriage, — child-bear- 
ing,—child-f/cs^^o^/sing".'  This  third  term  must  of  neces- 
sity mark  that  guidance,  that  care  of,  that  assiduity  con- 
cerning infant  children,  which   mothers  feel,  with  the 

'1  Tim.  iii.  2.  ''I  Tim.  iii.  12.  n  Tim.  v.  14. 


94  INFANT   BAPTISM.- 

most  lively  anxiety.  Who  interferes  with  a  mother's 
solicitude  for  her  infant? — the  father  may  sympathize 
with  it  when  indisposed ;  he  may  express  his  fondness 
in  kisses,  when  it  climbs  his  knee;  but,  it  is  the  mother 
who  must  despotise  it,  that  is,  direct  all  its  motions,  and 
watch  all  its  ways,  &c.  This  is  the  appointment  of 
nature ;  or  rather  of  God  in  his  providence.  They 
could  not  be  foster-children  to  which  the  apostle  refers ; 
for  he  speaks  of  child-bearing, — bearing  children  of  their 
own  body,  immediately  before :  nor  could  they  be  adults, 
as  is  evident  to  the  humblest  capacity,  for  then,  neither 
couW  their  mother  despotise  them;  nor  could  she  be 
young,  if  her  children  were  of  mature  age.  Observe, 
also,  the  change  of  term:  the  father  (bishop  or  deacon) 
is  to  rule  his  family :  the  mother  must  despotise  her  ofi- 
spring,  her  infant,  with  strict,  unremitted,  indefatigable 
— in  one  word,  with  maternal  solicitude.  Evidently,  the 
infant  familj^  is  of  necessity  attached  to  their  mother; 
.and  equally  evidently,  the  mother  is  attached  to  the  in- 
fant family. 

"I  demand  therefore  valid  reasons  why  ihQ  family 
attached  to  their  mother,  Lydia,'  was  not  a  young  family? 
for  it  is  a  contravention  of  nature  to  assume,  without  evi- 
dence, that  it  was  adult." 

In  addition  to  all  this,  the  Editor  of  Calmet  offers  no 
less  than  fifty  examples  in  proof  of  the  fact,  that  cwcf 
(house)  when  used  in  application  to  persons,  denotes  a 
family  of  children,  including  children  of  all  ages,  and 
assures  us  that  as  many  as  three  hundred  instances  have 
been  examined,  and  have  proved  perfectly  satisfactory.' 

With  the  view  to  a  more  satisfactory  illustration  of  the 
preceding  remarks,  we  shall  present  to  our  readers  the 

'See  Ed.  of  Cal.  p.  155. 


FOURTH  ARGUMENT.  9'5 

outlines  of  a  house,  as  such  buildings  are  commonly  con- 
structed in  Greece  ;  and  as  we  have  every  reason  to 
believe,  they  were  generally  constructed  in  ancient  ages. 
Certainly  we  do  not  mean  to  infer,  that  every  house  cor- 
responds to  this  plan,  but  the  draft  will  enable  us  to 
form  a  tolerable  conception  of  such  an  establishment. 


t 

CQ 

Garden  or  grounds 

• 

o 

p" 
o 

HOUSE 

.2 
"o 

TO 
QJ 
m 

;=! 
o 

o 

OIKOS 
FAMILY 

Court. 

J3- 
O 

m 
fo 

CO 

S- 
S" 

p" 
3 
m 

Court. 

Door. 

OIKIA. 

OIKIA 

Entrance  or  ffate. 


The  first  thing  to  be  noticed  in  this  figure  is,  the  sepa- 
ration of  the  out-houses  from  the  principal  dwelling.  It 
is  plain  that  the  house  does  not  include  the  grounds  and 
adjacent  tenements  ;  the  house  might  be  built  up  or 
pulled  down,  enlarged  or  diminislied,  without  affecting 
the  appendant  buildings  in  the  least.  But  the  out-houses 
may  be  said,  without  any  force  on  language,  to  include 
the  house; — and  certainly  the  whole  may  be  expressed 
by  one  comprehensive  term,  viz :  establishment,  resi- 
dence, premises,  <fcc.  The  house,  omoc,  does  not  com- 
prehend the  whole  establishment ;  but  the  establishment, 
OIKIA,  includes  the  house.  Thus,  to  baptize  the  whole 
house,  meant  to  administer   the   ordinance   to   all   who 


96  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

dwelt  in  the  inner  or  centre  edifice,  whether  young  or 
old ;  and  to  preach  the  gospel  to  the  household,  or  o«w, 
implied  its  being  declared  to  servants,  retainers,  &c.;  in  a 
word,  to  all  who  belonged  to  the  establishment,  including 
the  family  proper. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

OBJECTIONS   TO   THIS   ARGUMENT. 

First  Objection. — "With  respect  to  the  jailor  it  is 
said,  that  the  apostles  spake  the  word  of  the  Lord  "  to 
all  that  were  in  his  house,"  and  that  "he  rejoiced, 
believing  in  God  with  his  house."  Now,  says  the  object- 
or, as  the  word  of  the  Lord  cannot  be  spoken  to  chil- 
dren, and  as  they  cannot  rejoice  and  believe  in  God,  it 
follows  that  no  children  belonged  to  his  house. 

Answer. — This  inference  is  by  no  means  justified  by 
the  circumstances  of  the  case.  From  all  that  we  can 
learn,  the  jailor  was  in  the  prime  of  life.  We  are 
informed  that  "he  drew  his  sword  and  would  have  killed 
himself,"  which  is  not  an  act  characteristic  of  age  but  of 
a  fervid  mind  and  a  hasty  temper.  Again,  "he  called  for 
lights  and  sprang  in  ;"'  which  in  the  original  expresses 
the  vigorous  action  of  a  strong  and  robust  body, — the 
vehement  burst  of  an  individual  full  of  strength.  More- 
over, it  is  said,  "  he  was  baptized  and  all  his,  straight- 
way, that  is,  he  and  his  numerous  family.*  It  is  there- 
fore at  least  probable  that  his  family  contained  young 
children.     But  there  is  another  circumstance  which  ren- 

-The  Editor  of  Calmet  has  abundantly  estabUshed  the  fact,  that 
the  words,  all  and  whole,  in  Scripture,  and  especially  when  prefixed 
to  families,  import  many  and  numerous.     He  cites  some  dozen  or 
more  cases  in  support  of  tliis  truth.     See  p.  113 — 114. 
9 


98  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

ders  it  in  our  view  certain.  When  the  apostle  says, 
V.  31,  "  thou  shalt  be  saved  and  thy  house,"  he  used  the 
word,  owo?,  which  in  this  case  means  only  children,  or 
children  in  connection  with  their  parents  ;  but  when  the 
individuals  to  whom  the  word  of  the  Lord  was  preached, 
are  included,  bikoc  is  dropped  and  oma.  substituted,  signify- 
ing household,  including  servants,  prisoners,  &c.;  and 
finally,  when  the  fact  of  baptism  is  mentioned  it  is  sim- 
ply said,  "he  was  baptized  and  all  his." 

Now  let  any  unprejudiced  reader  observe  the  nice  dis- 
crimination of  the  sacred  penman,  in  varying  and  adapt- 
ing his  language,  according  to  the  precise  idea  he  Avished 
to  convey, — using  the  word  house  or  family  at  one 
time, — to  denote  the  jailor  and  his  children,  and  the  term 
household  at  another — to  designate  servants,  prisoners, 
&c.,  and  then  let  him  impartially  decide  whether  no  chil- 
dren were  baptized  ? — The  only  apparent  difficulty  that 
remains,  is  contained  in  the  assertion  that,  "  he  and  all 
his  family  rejoiced ;"  but  may  there  not  be  infants  in  a 
family  that  rejoices, — nay,  may  not  young  children  them- 
selves of  four  or  five  years  of  age  rejoice?  Do  we  not 
read:  "  Out  of  the  mouths  of  babes  and  sucklings,  thou 
hast  perfected  praise  V — "  Allow,"  says  D.  Isaac,  "  that 
the  children  were  baptized  on  the  ground  of  their 
father'' s  faith,  and  all  the  mystery  and  difficulty  of  the 
passage  vanish  at  once."  . 


Second  Objection. — In  reference  to  the  baptism  of 
Lydia  and  her  family,  it  is  objected,  that  it  could  have 
embraced  no  children,  because  it  consisted  of  those  bre- 
thren spoken  of  in  the  40th  v.  of  Acts  xvi.  who  were 
comforted  by  Paul  and  Silas. 


OBJECTIONS.  99 

As  the  case  of  Lydia  affords  one  of  the  strongest  exhi- 
bitions of  the  argument  derived  from  family  baptism,  so 
the  objection  to  it,  is  one  of  the  weakest.  It  is  written  :^ 
"  and  when  she  was  baptized  and  her  household  ;"*  and 
the  objection  is  based  on  v.  40,  "and  they  (Paul  and 
Silas)  entered  into  the  house  of  Lydia,  and  when  they 
had  seen  the  brethren,  they  comforted  them." — But  this 
verse  does  not  so  much  as  intimate  that  "the  brethren" 
whom  the  apostles  comforted,  Avere  Lydia's  family,  and 
tlie  attempt  to  induce  this  belief,  is  not  only  unwarranted 
by  the  fair  construction  of  the  passage,  but  a  liberal  mind 
must  find  some  difficulty  in  suppressing  indignation  at 
witnessing  such  a  shallow  subterfuge  in  order  to  elude 
the  result  of  fair  and  conclusive  investigation.  Cer- 
tainly, Lydia  had  a  family,  for  it  is  expressly  so  stated  in 
the  text ;  it  is  scarcely  less  certain  that  her  family  em- 
braced children,  because  the  Greek  word  implying  that 
idea,  is  used  to  designate  her  family ;  and,  as  from  all 
tliat  we  can  learn,  she  had  not  yet  passed  the  meridian  of 
life,  some  of  her  children  must  have  been  in  an  infantile 
state.^  But  there  is  a  still  stronger  circumstance  con- 
nected with  the  baptism  of  her  family.  "  In  all  the  other 
instances  in  which  adults  are  mentioned  as  having  been 
baptized  along  with  the  head  of  the  family,  they  are 
mentioned  as  '  hearing,'  and  '  believing,'  or  in  some  terms 
which  amount  to  this.  Cornelius  had  called  together 
*  his  kinsmen  and  near  friends  ;'  and  while  Peter  spoke, 

'Acts  xvi.  15. 

-The  Greek  word  is  o/x;?,  and  should  have  been  rendered  house  or 
family,  not  household. 

"^It  is  a  remarkable  fact,  that  the  very  best  of  all  versions,  namely, 
the  Syriac,  which  was  probably  of  the  first  century, — reads,  "  and 
when  she  (Lydia)  was  baptized  with  her  children,"  &.c.  The 
Coptic  version  gives  the  same  reading. 


100  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

'  the  Holy  Ghost  fell  on  all  them  which  heard  the  ivord,'' 
'  and  he  commanded  them  to  be  baptized.'  So  the  adults 
in  the  house  of  the  jailor  at  Philippi,  were  persons  to 
whom  'the  word  of  the  Lord  was  spoken;'  and  although 
nothing  is  said  of  the  faith  of  any  but  the  jailor  himself, — 
for  the  words  are  more  properly  rendered, '  and  he  believ- 
ing in  God,  rejoiced  with  all  his  house,' — yet  is  the  joy 
which  appears  to  have  been  felt  by  the  adult  part  of  his 
house,  as  well  as  by  himself,  to  be  attributed  to  their 
faith.  Now,  as  it  does  not  appear  that  the  apostles, 
although  they  baptized  infant  children,  baptized  unbeliev- 
ing adult  servants  because  their  masters  or  mistresses 
believed,  and  yet  the  house  of  Lydia  were  baptized  along 
with  herself,  when  no  mention  at  all  is  made  of  the 
Lord  '  opening  the  heart'  of  the  adult  domestics,  nor  of 
their  believing ;  the  fair  inference  is,  that  '  the  house'  of 
Lydia  means  her  children  only,  and  that  being  of  imma- 
ture years,  they  were  baptized  wjth  their  mother  accord- 
ing to  the  common  custom  of  the  Jews,  to  baptize  the 
children  of  proselyted  gentiles  along  with  their  parents, 
from  which  practice  Christian  baptism  appears  to  have 
been  taken.'" 

The  various  suppositions  about  Lydia's  household 
meaning  "  her  partners  in  her  mercantile  operations ;" 
or  "  her  journeyman  dyers,"  as  she  was  "  a  seller  of 
purple;"  or  "her  travelling  companions,  as  she  is  said 
to  have  resided  at  Thyatira  and  been  only  on  a  visit  to 
Philippi,"^  et  id  genus  omne,  are  such  a  tissue  of 
wretched  fictions  and  pitiful  shifts  to  evade  the  omnipo- 

*See  Watson. 

''It  is  not  true  that  she  resided  at  Thyatira,  and  was  only  on  an 
expedition  of  traffic  at  Phihppi.  The  facts  of  the  case  are  these : 
she  was  a  native  of  Thyatira,  and  was  now  permanently  settled  at 
Philippi.     See  Editor  of  Calmet,  &c. 


OBJECTIONS.  101 

tent  power  of  truth,  that  we  cannot  stop  to  expose  them. 
They  afford  melancholy  proofs  that  some  men  are  so 
bent  upon  cutting  off  infants  from  the  church  of  CtOcI, 
that  they  will  rather  betake  themselves  to  empty  dreams 
and  airy  nothing  than  yield  to  arguments  founded  on 
stubborn  facts.  "  They  will  suppose,"  says  the  Rev. 
Mr.  Slicer,  "  that  even  partners  in  business,  with  Lydia, 
or  'journeyman  dyers,''  were  baptized,  and  constituted 
'  brethren,'  although  there  is  no  intimation  that  she  had 
so  much  as  one  partner  or  one  journeyman  ;  and  if  she 
had,  (which  we  think  very  unlikely,)  then  they  were 
baptized  and  made  brethren,  without  grace  ;  for  the  pas- 
sage makes  no  mention  of  the  heart  of  any  person  being 
opened,  except  Lydia's  ;  and  there  is  no  intimation  that 
those  journeymen  either  repented  or  believed,  and  of 
course  could  not  have  received  '  believer's  baptism.'  I 
appeal  to  }^ou,  reader,  to  judge,  who  would  be  the  most 
fit  for  baptism, — the  children  of  a  believing  mother,  or  a 
household  of  oTttce/ess  'journeyman  dyers  T  'I  speak 
as  unto  wise  men.'  "^ 

The  objections  offered  to  prove  that  there  were  no 
young  children  in  the  families  of  Cornelius  and  Ste- 
phanas, are  of  a  piece  with  those  already  considered  in 
relation  to  the  jailor  and  Lydia,  and  hence  we  shall  not 
fatigue  our  readers  with  a  refutation  of  them.  It  strikes 
us,  our  Baptist  brethren  are  compelled  to  lay  their  inge- 
nuity under  heavy  contributions  as  well  as  to  make  large 
drafts  on  public  credulity,  in  order  to  render  it  even 
supposable  that  not  one  of  all  these  families  contained  a 
single  young  child.  And  even  if  they  could  satisfactorily 
dispose  of  these  four  families ;  there  are  seven  others  to 
be  gotten  rid  of  ;'^  and  then,  there  is  that  of  the  nobleman 

'See  Slicer's  Appeal  on  Baptism,  p.  63.         *See  page  89. 
9* 


102  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

at  Capernaum,  who  is  said  to  have  believed  "and  all 
(his  numerous)  house,^^^  and  must  therefore  ivith  his 
house  have  received  baptism;  they  must  prove  that  in 
his  family  also,  there  were  no  childi-en,  although  his  sick 
son  is  not  said  to  have  been  his  only  offspring,  and  even 
that  son  is  called  by  him  a  child,  the  diminutive  term 
TuiJ-iov  being  used.  And  after  all,  admitting  that  they 
should  be  able  to  disprove  the  existence  of  little  infants 
in  all  these  families,  still  the  great  practice  and  principle 
of  family  baptism,  that  is,  of  receiving  all  the  younger 
members  of  families  on  the  faith  of  their  parents  or  do- 
mestic head,  would  remain  unaffected  and  be  decisively 
established.  This  furnishes  a  foundation  on  which  the 
friends  of  infant  baptism  may  plant  themselves,  as  on  a 
rock  that  cannot  be  moved.  Well  may  it  be  asked: 
"  Was  it  ever  known  that  a  case  of  family  baptism  oc- 
curred under  the  direction  of  a  Baptist  minister?  Was 
it  ever  known  to  be  recorded,  or  to  have  happened,  that 
when,  under  the  influence  of  Baptist  ministrations,  the 
parents  of  large  families  were  hopefully  converted,  they 
were  baptized,  they  and  all  theirs  straightway?  There 
is  no  risk  in  asserting  that  such  a  case  was  never  heard 
of.  And  why  ?  Evidently  because  our  Baptist  brethren 
do  not  act  in  this  matter  upon  the  principles  laid  doAvn  in 
the  New  Testament,  and  which  regulated  the  primitive 
Christians."^ 

Dr.  Wardlaw's  observation  on  this  subject  is  pithy: 
"It  is  a  remarkable  fact,"  says  he,  "that  we  have  no 
mention  of  any  thing  resembling  the  baptism  of  house- 
holds or  families,  in  the  accounts  of  the  propagation  of 
the  gospel  by  our  Baptist  brethren.  That  the  apostle 
baptized  families,  no  believer  of  the  Scripture  history  can 

'Jolin  iv.  53.  2See  Miller,  page  15. 


OBJECTIONS.  103 

doubt ;  and  we  have  seen,  that  the  manner  in  which  such 
baptisms  are  recorded,  or  referred  to,  indicates  no  extra- 
ordinary thing.  Now  it  surely  is  an  extraordinary  thing, 
that  in  the  journals  and  periodical  accounts  of  Baptist  mis- 
sions in  heathen  countries,  we  should  never  meet  with 
any  thing  of  the  kind.  I  question,  whether,  in  the  thirty 
years  of  the  history  of  the  Baptist  mission  in  India,  there 
is  to  be  found  a  single  instance  of  the  baptism  of  a  house- 
hold. When  do  we  find  a  Baptist  missionary  saying, 
'when  she  was  baptized  and  her  family' — or,  'I  bap- 
tized the  family  of  Krishnoo,'  or  any  other  convert  ?  We 
have  the  baptism  of  individuals ;  but  nothing  correspond- 
ing to  the  apostolic  baptism  of  families.  This  fact  is  a 
strong  corroborative  proof,  that  there  is  some  difference 
between  their  practice  and  that  of  the  apostles.  If  the 
practice  of  both  were  the  same,  there  might  surely  be  ex- 
pected some  little  correspondence  in  the  facts  connected 
with  it.'" 

'See  Dissertation  on  Infant  Baptism,  p.  109. 


CHAPTER  X. 

FIFTH    ARGUMENT. 

Tlie  uniform  practice  of  the  Christian  church,  from 
the  earliest  period  down  to  the  present  time,  affords  an 
unanswerable  argument  in  favor  of  infant  baptism. 

If  it  can  be  incontestibly  proved  from  history  that  this 
sacrament  Avas  administered  to  children  during  the  apos- 
tohc  age ;  that  it  continued  to  be  administered  from  that 
time  forward,  in  all  subsequent  ages  by  the  great  body  of 
the  church ;  that  during  the  long  space  of  no  less  than 
ELEVEN  HUNDRED  YEARS  after  tliB  birth  of  our  Lord,  there 
was  not  a  single  denomination  on  the  face  of  the  earth 
that  ventured  to  call  in  question  the  necessity  of  infant 
baptism,  on  any  ground  or  plea  whatever ;  that  the  first 
sect  that  ever  did  oppose  it  was  a  small  faction  in  the 
twelfth  century,  headed  by  a  Frenchman,  called  Peter  de 
Bruis,  who  held  to  the  unscriptural  and  heartless  opinion " 
that  infants  could  not  be  saved  under  any  circumstances 
whatever,  and  therefore  ought  not  to  be  baptized ;  that 
for  FIFTEEN  CENTURIES  it  was  iiot  opposed  at  all  on  any 
such  grounds  as  are  now  urged  by  our  Baptist  brethren ; 
and  that  the  very  first  body  of  people  in  the  whole  Chris- 
tian world,  who  did  reject  it  on  these  grounds,  were  a 
fanatical  sect  called  Anabaptists,^  who  arose  in  Germany 

'The  word  Anabaptist  is  derived  from  ava,  "  anew"  and  Ba^T/s-TiJC, 
a  Baptist,  signifying  that  those  who  have  been  baptized  in  their  in- 
fancy ought  to  be  baptized  anew. 


FIFTH   ARGUMENT.  105 

in  the  year  1522/  If  all  this  can  fairly  be  made  to  ap- 
pear on  credible  historical  evidence,  then  will  infant  bap- 
tism be  founded  on  a  rock,  steadfast,  immoveable,  and 
ever-during  as  the  visible  church  of  God  itself. — We 
shall  now  endeavor  to  establish  these  facts : — 

"  TertuUian,  about  two  hundred  years  after  the  birth 
of  Christ,  is  the  first  man  of  whom  we  read  in  ecclesias- 
tical history,  as  speaking  a  word  against  infant  baptism ; 
and  he,  while  he  recognises  the  existence  and  prevalence 
of  the  practice,  and  expressly  recommends  that  infants 
be  baptized,  if  they  are  not  likely  to  survive  the  period 
of  infancy ;  yet  advises  that,  where  there  is  a  prospect 
of  their  living,  baptism  be  delayed  until  a  late  period  in 
life.  But  what  was  the  reason  of  this  advice?  The 
moment  we  look  at  the  reason,  we  see  that  it  avails  no- 
thing to  the  cause  in  support  of  which  it  is  sometimes  pro- 
duced. TertuUian  adopted  the  superstitious  idea,  that 
baptism  was  accompanied  Avith  the  remission  of  all  past 
sins ;  and  that  sins  committed  after  baptism  w^ere  peculi- 
arly dangerous.  He,  therefore,  advised,  that  not  merely 
infants,  but  young  men  and  young  women;  and  even 
young  widows  and  widowers  should  postpone  their  bap- 
tism until  the  period  of  youthful  appetite  and  passion 
should  have  passed.  In  short,  he  advised  that,  in  all 
cases  in  which  death  was  not  likely  to  intervene,  baptism 
be  postponed,  until  the  subjects  of  it  should  have  arrived 
at  a  period  of  life,  when  they  would  be  no  longer  in  dan- 
ger of  being  led  astray  by  youthful  lusts.  And  thus,  for 
more  than  a  century  after  the  age  of  TertuUian,  we  find 
some  of  the  most  conspicuous  converts  to  the  Christian 
faith,  postponing  baptism  till  the  close  of  life.     Constan- 

'It  does  not  appear  that  there  was  any  congregation  of  Anabap- 
tists in  England,  till  the  year  1640.    See  Bishop  Tomlin's  Elements. 


106  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

tine  the  Great,  we  are  told,  though  a  professing  Christian 
for  many  years  before,  was  not  baptized  till  after  the 
commencement  of  his  last  illness.  The  same  fact  is  re- 
corded of  a  number  of  other  distinguished  converts  to 
Christianity,  about  and  after  that  time.  But  surely, 
advice  and  facts  of  this  kind  make  nothing  in  favor  of 
the  system  of  our  Baptist  brethren.  Indeed,  taken  alto- 
gether, their  historical  bearing  is  strongly  in  favor  of  our 
system. 

"The  next  persons  that  we  hear  of  as  calling  in  ques- 
tion the  propriety  of  infant  baptism,  were  the  small  body  of 
people  in  France,  about  twelve  hundred  years  after  Christ, 
who  followed  a  certain  Peter  de  Bruis,  and  formed  an 
inconsiderable  section  of  the  people  known  in  ecclesias- 
tical history  under  the  general  name  of  the  Waldenses. 
This  body  maintained  that  infants  ought  not  to  be  bap- 
tized, because  they  were  incapable  of  salvation.  They 
taught  that  none  could  be  saved  but  those  who  Avrought 
out  their  salvation  by  a  long  course  of  self-denial  and 
labor.  And  as  infants  were  incapable  of  thus  '  working 
out  their  own  salvation,'  they  held  that  making  them  the 
subjects  of  a  sacramental  seal,  was  an  absurdity.  But 
surely  our  Baptist  brethren  cannot  be  willing  to  consider 
these  people  as  their  predecessors,  or  to  adopt  their  creed. 

"  We  hear  no  more  of  any  society  or  organized  body 
of  dntipedobaptists,  until  the  sixteenth  century,  when 
they  arose  as  before  stated,  in  Germany,  and  for  the  first 
time  broached  the  doctrine  of  our  modern  Baptist  bre- 
thren. As  far  as  we  have  been  able  to  discover,  they 
were  absolutely  unknown  in  the  whole  Christian  world 
before  that  time. 

"  But  we  have  something  more  than  mere  negative  testi- 
mony on  this  subject.     It  is  not  only  certain,  that  we 


FIFTH   ARGUMENT.  107 

hear  of  no  society  of  Jintipedobaptists  resembling  our 
present  Baptist  brethren,  for  more  than  fifteen  hundred 
years  after  Christ ;  but  we  have  positive  and  direct  proof 
that,  during  the  whole  of  that  time,  infant  baptism  was  the 
general  and  unopposed  practice  of  the  Christian  church. 

"  To  say  nothing  of  earlier  intimations,  wholly  irre- 
concilable with  any  other  practice  than  that  of  infant 
baptism,  Origen,  a  Greek  father  of  the  third  century, 
and  decidedly  the  most  learned  man  of  his  day,  speaks 
in  the  most  unequivocal  terms  of  the  baptism  of  infants, 
as  the  general  practice  of  the  church  in  his  time,  and  as 
having  been  received  from  the  apostles.  His  testimony 
is  as  follows :  '  According  to  the  usage  of  the  church, 
baptism  is  given  even  to  infants  ;  when,  if  there  were 
nothing  in  infants  which  needed  forgiveness  and  mercy, 
the  grace  of  baptism  would  seem  to  be  superfluous.' 
Hom.  viii.  in  Levit.  ch.  12.  Again  :  '  Infants  are  bap- 
tized for  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  Of  what  sins  ?  Or 
when  have  they  sinned  ?  Or  can  there  be  any  reason 
for  the  laver  in  their  case,  unless  it  be  according  to  the 
sense  which  we  have  mentioned  above,  viz.,  that  no 
one  is  free  from  pollution,  though  he  has  lived  but  one 
day  upon  earth  ?  And  because  by  baptism  native  pollu- 
tion is  taken  away,  therefore  infants  are  baptized.' 
Hom.  in  Luc.  14.  Again:  'For  this  cause  was  it  that 
the  church  received  an  order  from  the  apostles  to  give 
baptism  even  to  infants.'^ 

"The  testimony  of  Cyprian,  a  Latin  father  of  the  third 
century,  contemporary  with  Origen,  is  no  less  decisive. 
It  is  as  follows  : 

"  In  the  year  253  after  Christ,  there  was  a  council  of 
sixty-six  bishops  or  pastors  held  at  Carthage,  in  which 

'Comment,  in  Epist.  ad  Romanes,  Lib.  5. 


108  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

Cyprian  presided.  To  this  council,  Fidus,  a  country 
pastor,  presented  the  following  question,  which  he  wished 
them,  by  their  united  wisdom,  to  solve,  viz..  Whether 
it  was  necessary,  in  the  administration  of  baptism,  as  of 
circumcision,  to  wait  until  the  eighth  day  ;  or  whether 
a  child  might  be  baptized  at  an  earlier  period  after  its 
birth?  The  question,  it  will  be  observed,  was  not 
whether  infants  ought  to  be  baptized  ?  That  was  taken 
for  granted.  But  simply,  whether  it  was  necessary  to 
wait  until  the  eighth  day  after  their  birth  ?  The  coun- 
cil came  unanimously  to  the  following  decision,  and 
transmitted  it  in  a  letter  to  the  inquirer. 

"  '  Cyprian  and  the  rest  of  the  bishops  who  were  pre- 
sent in  the  council,  sixty-six  in  number,  to  Fidus,  our 
brother,  greeting: 

"  '  As  to  the  case  of  infants, — whereas  you  judge  that 
they  must  not  be  baptized  within  two  or  three  days  after 
they  are  born,  and  that  the  rule  of  circumcision  is  to  be 
observed,  that  no  one  should  be  baptized  and  sanctified 
before  the  eighth  day  after  he  is  born  ;  we  were  all  in 
the  council  of  a  very  different  opinion.  As  for  what 
you  thought  proper  to  be  done,  no  one  was  of  your  mind; 
but  we  all  rather  judged  that  the  mercy  and  grace  of  God 
is  to  be  denied  to  no  human  being  that  is  born.  This, 
therefore,  dear  brother,  was  our  opinion  in  the  council ; 
that  we  ought  not  to  hinder  any  person  from  baptism 
and  the  grace  of  God,  who  is  merciful  and  kind  to  us 
all.  And  this  rule,  as  it  holds  for  all,  we  think  more 
especially  to  be  observed  in  reference  to  infants,  even  to 
those  newly  born.'     Cyprian,  Epist.  66. 

"  Surely  no  testimony  can  be  more  unexceptionable 
and  decisive  than  this.  Lord  Chancellor  King,  in  his 
account  of  the  primitive  church,  after  quoting  what  is 


FIFTH   ARGUMENT.  109 

given  above,  and  much  more,  subjoins  the  following  re- 
mark :  '  Here,  then,  is  a  synodical  decree  for  the  baptism 
of  infants,  as  formal  as  can  possibly  be  expected  ;  which 
being  the  judgment  of  a  synod,  is  more  authentic  and 
cogent  than  that  of  a  private  father  ;  it  being  supposable 
that  a  private  father  might  write  his  own  particular  judg- 
ment and  opinion  only  ;  but  the  determination  of  a  synod 
(and  he  might  have  added,  the  unanimous  determination 
of  a  synod  of  sixty-six  members)  denotes  the  common 
practice  and  usage  of  the  whole  church." 

The  famous  Chrysostom,  a  Greek  father,  who  flour- 
ished towards  the  close  of  the  fourth  century,  having 
had  occasion  to  speak  of  circumcision,  and  of  the  incon- 
venience and  pain  which  attended  its  dispensation,  pro- 
ceeds to  say,  '  But  our  circumcision,  I  mean  the  grace  of 
baptism,  gives  cure  without  pain,  and  procures  to  us  a 
thousand  benefits,  and  fills  us  with  the  grace  of  the  Spir- 
it ;  and  it  has  no  determinate  time,  as  that  had ;  but  one 
that  is  in  the  very  beginning  of  his  age,  or  one  that  is 
in  the  middle  of  it,  or  one  that  is  in  his  old  age,  may  re- 
ceive this  circumcision  made  without  hands;  in  which 
there  is  no  trouble  to  be  undergone  but  to  throw  off"  the 
load  of  sins,  and  to  receive  pardon  for  all  past  offences.' 
Homil.  40.  in  Genesin. 

"  Passing  by  the  testimony  of  several  other  conspicuous 
writers  of  the  third  and  fourth  centuries,  in  support  of 
the  fact,  that  infant  baptism  was  generally  practised  when 
they  wrote,  I  shall  detain  you  with  only  one  testimony 
more  in  relation  to  the  history  of  this  ordinance.  It  is 
that  of  Jlgustine,  one  of  the  most  pious,  learned  and 
venerable  fathers  of  the  Christian  Church,  who  lived  a 

'Inquiry  into  the  Constitution,  Stc.    Part.  ii.  chap.  3. 
10 


110  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

little  more  than  three  hundred  years  after  the  Apostles, — 
taken  in  connexion  with  that  of  Pelagius,  the  learned 
heretic,  who  lived  at  the  same  time.  Augustine  had 
been  pleading  against  Pelagius,  in  favor  of  the  doctrine 
of  original  sin.  In  the  course  of  this  plea,  he  asks — 
♦  Why  are  infants  baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins,  if 
they  have  no  sin?'  At  the  same  time  intimating  to  Pela- 
gius, that  if  he  would  be  consistent  with  himself,  his 
denial  of  original  sin  must  draw  after  it  the  denial  of  in- 
fant baptism.  The  reply  of  Pelagius  is  striking  and 
unequivocal.  'Baptism,'  says  he,  'ought  to  be  adminis- 
tered to  infants,  with  the  same  sacramental  words  Avhich 
are  used  in  the  case  of  adult  persons.' — '  Men  slander  me 
as  if  I  denied  the  sacrament  of  baptism  to  infants.' — '  / 
never  heard  of  any,  not  even  the  7nost  impious  heretic, 
laho  denied  baptism  to  infants;  for  who  can  be  so  impi- 
ous as  to  hinder  infants  from  being  baptized,  and  born 
again  in  Christ,  and  so  make  them  miss  of  the  kingdom 
of  God?'  Again:  Augustine  remarks,  in  reference  to 
the  Pelagians — 'Since  they  grant  that  infants  must  be 
baptized,  as  not  being  able  to  resist  the  authority  of 
the  ivhole  church,  which  ivas  doubtless  delivered  by  our 
Lord  and  his  apostles;  they  must  consequently  grant 
that  they  stand  in  need  of  the  benefit  of  the  Mediator ; 
that  being  offered  by  the  sacrament,  and  by  the  charity 
of  the  faithful,  and  so  being  incorporated  into  Christ's 
body,  they  may  be  reconciled  to  God,'  &c.  Again, 
speaking  of  certain  heretics  at  Carthage,  who,  though 
they  acknowledged  infant  baptism,  took  wrong  views  of 
its  meaning,  Augustine  remarks — 'They,  minding  the 
Scriptures,  and  the  authority  of  the  ivhole  church,  and 
the  form  of  the  sacrament  itself,  see  well  that  baptism  in 
infants   is  for  the  remission  of  sins.'     Further,  in  his 


FIFTH    ARGUMENT.  Ill 

work  against  the  Donatists,  the  same  writer  speaking  of 
baptized  infants  obtaining  salvation  without  the  personal 
exercise  of  faith,  he  says — 'which  the  lohole  body  of  the 
church  holds,  as  delivtred  to  them  in  the  case  of  little 
infants  baptized;  who  certainly  cannot  believe  with  the 
heart  unto  righteousness,  or  confess  with  the  mouth  unto 
salvation,  nay,  by  their  crying  and  noise  while  the  sacra- 
ment is  administering,  they  disturb  the  holy  mysteries : 
and  yet  no  Christian  man  will  say  that  they  are  baptized 
to  no  purpose.'  Again,  he  says — 'The  custom  of  our 
mother  the  church  in  baptizing  infants  must  not  be  disre- 
garded, nor  be  accounted  needless,  nor  believed  to  be  any 
tiling  else  than  an  ordinance  delivered  to  us  from  the 
apostles.''  In  short,  those  who  will  be  at  the  trouble  to 
consult  the  large  extracts  from  the  writings  of  Augustine, 
among  other  Christian  fathers,  in  the  learned  JVcUfs  His- 
tory of  Infant  Baptism,  will  find  that  venerable  father 
declaring  again  and  again  that  he  never  met  Avith  any 
Christian,  either  of  the  general  church,  or  of  any  of  the 
sects,  nor  with  any  writer,  who  owned  the  authority  of 
Scripture,  who  taught  any  other  doctrine  than  that  infants 
were  to  be  baptized  for  the  remission  of  sin.  Here, 
then,  were  two  men  undoubtedly  among  the  most  learned 
then  in  the  world — Augustine  and  Pelagius ;  the  former 
as  familiar  probably  with  the  writings  of  all  the  distin- 
guished fathers  who  had  gone  before  him,  as  any  man  of 
his  time ;  the  latter  also  a  man  of  great  learning  and 
talents,  who  had  travelled  over  the  greater  part  of  the 
Christian  world ;  who  both  declare,  about  three  hundred 
years  after  the  apostolic  age,  that  they  never  saw  or  heard 
of  any  one  who  called  himself  a  Christian,  not  even  the 
most  impious  heretic,  no  nor  any  writer  who  claimed  to 
believe  in  the  Scriptures,  who  denied  the  baptism  of  in- 


113  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

fants.  See  Wall's  History,  Part  I.  ch.  15—19.  Can 
the  most  incredulous  reader,  who  is  not  fast  bound  in  the 
fetters  of  invincible  prejudice,  hesitate  to  admit,  first,  that 
these  men  verily  believed  that  infant  baptism  had  been 
the  universal  practice  of  the  church  from  the  days  of  the 
apostles ;  and  secondly,  that  situated  and  informed  as 
they  were,  it  was  impossible  that  they  should  be  mis- 
taken. 

"The  same  Augustine,  in  his  Epistle  to  Boniface, 
while  he  expresses  an  opinion  that  the  parents  are  the 
proper  persons  to  offer  up  their  children  to  God  in  bap- 
tism, if  they  be  good  faithful  Christians ;  yet  thinks  pro- 
per to  mention  that  others  may,  with  propriety,  in  spe- 
cial cases,  perform  the  same  kind  office  of  Christian 
charity.  'You  see,'  says  he,  'that  a  great  many  are 
offered,  not  by  their  parents,  but  by  any  other  persons, 
as  infant  slaves  are  sometimes  offered  by  their  masters. 
And  sometimes  when  the  parents  are  dead,  the  infants 
are  baptized,  being  offered  by  any  that  can  afford  to  show 
this  compassion  on  them.  And  sometimes  infants  whom 
their  parents  have  cruelly  exposed,  may  be  taken  up  and 
offered  in  baptism  by  those  who  have  no  children  of  their 
own,  nor  design  to  have  any.'  Again,  in  his  book 
against  the  Donatists,  speaking  directly  of  infant  bap- 
tism, he  says—'  If  any  one  ask  for  divine  authority  in 
this  matter,  although  that  which  the  whole  church  prac- 
tises, which  was  not  instituted  by  councils,  but  was  ever 
in  use,  is  very  reasonably  believed  to  be  no  other  than  a 
thing  delivered  by  the  authority  of  the  apostles ;  yet  we 
may  besides  take  a  true  estimate,  how  much  the  sacra- 
ment of  baptism  does  avail  infants,  by  the  circumcision 
which  God's  ancient  people  received.  For  Abraham  was 
justified  before  he  received  circumcision,  as  Cornelius 


FIFTH   ARGUMENT.  113 

was  endued  with  the  Holy  Spirit  before  he  was  baptized, 
Aad  yet  the  apostle  says  of  Abraham,  that  he  received 
tlie  sign  of  circumcision,  "a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of 
faith,"  by  which  he  had  in  heart  believed,  and  it  had  been 
"counted  to  him  for  righteousness."  Why  then  was  he 
commanded  to  circumcise  all  his  male  infants  on  the 
eighth  day,  when  they  could  not  yet  believe  with  the 
heart,  that  it  might  be  counted  to  them  for  righteousness ; 
but  for  this  reason,  because  the  sacrament  is,  in  itself  of 
great  importance?  Therefore,  as  in  Abraham,  "the 
righteousness  of  faith"  went  before,  and  circumcision, 
"the  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith  came  after;"  so 
in  Cornelius,  the  spiritual  sanctification  by  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  went  before,  and  the  sacrament  of  regenera- 
tion, by  the  laver  of  baptism,  came  after.  And  as  in 
Isaac,  M'ho  was  circumcised  the  eighth  day,  the  seal  of 
Uie  righteousness  of  faith  went  before,  and  (as  he  was  a 
follower  of  his  father's  faith)  the  righteousness  itself,  the 
seal  whereof  had  gone  before  in  his  infancy,  came  after ; 
so  in  infants  baptized,  the  sacrament  of  regeneration  goes 
before,  and  (if  they  put  in  practice  the  Christian  religion) 
conversion  of  the  heart,  the  mystery  whereof  went  before 
in  tlieir  body,  comes  after.  By  all  which  it  appears,  that 
tlie  sacrament  of  baptism  is  one  thing,  and  conversion  of 
the  heart  another.' 

"  So  much  for  the  testimony  of  the  fathers.  To  me, 
I  acknowledge,  this  testimony  carries  with  it  irresistible 
conviction.  It  is,  no  doubt,  conceivable,  considered  in 
itself,  that  in  three  centuries  from  the  days  of  the  apos- 
tles, a  very  material  change  might  have  taken  place  in 
regard  to  the  subjects  of  baptism.  But  that  a  change  so 
serious  and  radical  as  that  of  which  our  Baptist  brethren 
speak,  should  have  been  introduced  without  the  knowU 
10* 


114  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

edge  of  such  men  as  have  been  just  quoted,  is  not  con- 
ceivable. That  the  church  should  have  passed  from  the 
practice  of  none  but  adult  baptism,  to  that  of  the  constant 
and  universal  baptism  of  infants,  while  such  a  change 
was  utterly  unknown  and  never  heard  of,  by  the  most 
active,  pious,  and  learned  men  that  lived  during  that 
period,  cannot,  I  must  believe,  be  imagined  by  any  im- 
partial mind.  Now  when  Origen,  Cyprian,  and  Chrys- 
ostom,  declare,  not  only  that  the  baptism  of  infants  was 
the  universal  and  unopposed  practice  of  the  church  in 
tlieir  respective  times  and  places  of  residence ;  and  when 
men  of  so  much  acquaintance  with  all  preceding  writers, 
and  so  much  knowledge  of  all  Christendom,  as  Augustine 
and  Pelagius,  declared  that  they  never  heard  of  any  one 
who  claimed  to  he  a  Christian,  either  orthodox  or  here- 
tic,  who  did  not  maintain  and  practice  infant  baptism; 
1  say,  to  suppose,  in  the  face  of  such  testimony,  that  the 
practice  of  infant  baptism  crept  in,  as  an  unwarranted 
innovation,  between  their  time  and  that  of  the  apostles, 
without  the  smallest  notice  of  the  change  having  ever 
reached  their  ears  is,  I  must  be  allowed  to  say,  of  all 
incredible  suppositions,  one  of  the  most  incredible.  He 
who  can  believe  this,  must,  it  appears  to  me,  be  pre- 
pared to  make  a  sacrifice  of  all  historical  evidence  at  the 
shrine  of  blind  and  deaf  prejudice. 

It  is  here  also  worthy  of  particular  notice,  that  those 
pious  and  far  famed  witnesses  for  the  truth,  commonly 
known  by  the  name  of  the  TValdenses,  did  undoubtedly 
hold  the  doctrine  of  infant  baptism,  and  practise  accord- 
ingly. In  their  Confessions  of  Faith  and  other  writings, 
drawn  up  between  the  twelfth  and  sixteenth  centuries, 
and  in  which  they  represent  their  creeds  and  usages  as 
handed  down,  from  father  to  son,  for  seveial  hundred 


FIFTH   ARGUMENT.  115 

years  before  the  Reformation,  they  speak  on  the  subject 
before  us  so  frequently  and  explicitly,  as  to  preclude  all 
doubt  in  regard  to  the  fact  alleged.  The  following  spec- 
imen of  their  language  will  satisfy  every  reasonable  in- 
quirer. 

"'Baptism,'  say  they,  "is  administered  in  a  full  con- 
gregation of  the  faithful,  to  the  end  that  he  that  is  received 
into  the  church  may  be  reputed  and  held  of  all  as  a 
Christian  brother,  and  that  all  the  congregation  may  pray 
for  him  that  he  may  be  a  Christian  in  heart,  as  he  is  out- 
wardly esteemed  to  be  a  Christian.  And  for  this  cause 
it  is  that  we  present  our  children  in  baptism,  which 
ought  to  be  done  by  those  to  whom  the  children  are  most 
nearly  related,  such  as  their  parents,  or  those  to  whom 
God  has  given  this  charity.' 

"Again;  referring  to  the  superstitious  additions  to  bap- 
tism which  the  Papists  had  introduced,  they  say,  in  one 
of  tlieir  ecclesiastical  documents, — 'The  things  which 
are  not  necessary  in  baptism  are,  the  exorcisms,  the 
breathings,  the  sign  of  the  cross  upon  the  head  or  fore- 
head of  the  infant,  the  salt  put  into  the  mouth,  the  spit- 
tle into  the  ears  and  nostrils,  the  unction  of  the  breast, 
&c.  From  these  things  many  take  an  occasion  of  error 
and  superstition,  rather  than  of  edifying  and  salvation.' 

"  Understanding  that  their  Popish  neighbors  charged 
them  with  denying  the  baptism  of  infants,  they  acquit 
themselves  of  this  imputation  as  follows  : 

" '  Neither  is  the  time  nor  place  appointed  for  those 
who  are  to  be  baptized.  But  charity  and  the  edification 
of  the  church  and  congregation  ought  to  be  the  rule  in 
this  matter. 

'"Yet,  notwithstanding,  we  bring  our  children  to  be 
baptized;  Avhich  they  ought  to  do  to  whom   they  are 


116  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

most  nearly  related;  such  as  their  parents,  or  those  whom 
God  hath  inspired  with  such  a  charity.' " 

"  '  True  it  is,'  adds  the  historian,  '  that  being,  for 
some  hundreds  of  years,  constrained  to  suffer  their  chil- 
dren to  be  baptized  by  the  Romish  priests,  they  deferred 
the  performance  of  it  as  long  as  possible,  because  they 
detested  the  human  inventions  annexed  to  the  institution 
of  that  holy  sacrament,  which  they  looked  upon  as  so 
many  pollutions  of  it.  And  by  reason  of  their  pastors, 
whom  they  called  Barbes,  being  often  abroad  travelling 
in  the  service  of  the  church,  they  could  not  have  baptism 
administesed  to  their  children  by  them.  They,  there- 
fore, sometimes  kept  them  long  without  it.  On  account 
of  which  delay,  the  priests  have  charged  them  with  that 
reproach.  To  which  charge  not  only  their  adversaries 
have  given  credit,  but  also  many  of  those  who  have  ap- 
proved of  their  lives  and  faith  in  all  other  respect s.^^ 

"  It  being  so  plainly  a  fact,  established  by  their  own 
unequivocal  and  repeated  testimony,  that  the  great  body 
of  the  Waldenses  were  Pedobaptists,  on  what  ground  is  it 
that  our  Baptist  brethren  assert,  and  that  some  have  been 
found  to  credit  the  assertion,  that  those  venerable  wit- 
nesses of  the  truth  rejected  the  baptism  of  infants?  The 
answer  is  easy  and  ample.     A  small  section  of  the  peo- 

'See  John  Paul  Perrin's  Account  of  the  Doctrine  and  Order  of 
the  Waldenses  and  Albigenses ;  Sir  Samuel  Morland's  do. ;  and  also 
Leger's  Histoire  Generale  des  Eglises  Vaudoises.  Mr.  William 
Jones,  a  Baptist,  in  a  work  entitled,  a  History  of  the  Waldenses,  in 
two  volumes  octavo,  professes  to  give  a  full  account  of  the  Faith 
and  Order  of  these  pious  witnesses  of  the  truth ;  but,  so  far  as  I 
have  observed,  carefully  leaves  out  of  all  their  public  formularies 
and  other  documents,  every  thing  which  would  disclose  their  Pedo- 
baptist  prmciples  and  practice !  On  this  artifice  comment  is  unne- 
cessary. 


FIFTH   ARGUMENT.  117 

pie  bearing  the  general  name  of  Waldenses,  followers  of 
Peter  de  Bruis,  who  were  mentioned  in  a  preceding  page, 
while  they  agreed  with  the  mass  of  their  denomination 
in  most  other  matters,  differed  from  them  in  regard  to  the 
subject  of  infant  baptism.     They  held,  as  before  stated, 
that  infants  were  not  capable  of  salvation;  that  Christian 
salvation  is  of  such  a  nature  that  none  can  partake  of  it 
but  those  who  undergo  a  course  of  rigorous  self-denial 
and  labor  in  its  pursuit.     Those  who  die  in  infancy  not 
being  capable  of  this,  the  Petrobrussians  held  that  they 
were  not  capable  of  salvation ;  and,  this  being  the  case, 
that  they  ought  not  to  be  baptized.     This,  hoAvever,  is 
not  the  doctrine  of  our  Baptist  brethren ;  and,  of  course, 
furnishes  no  support  to  their  creed  or  practice.     But  the 
decisive  answer  is,  that  the  Petrobrussians  were  a  very 
small  fraction  of  the  great  Waldensian  body ;  probably 
not  more  than  a  thirtieth  or  fortieth  part  of  the  whole. 
The  great  mass  of  the  denomination,  however,  as  such, 
declare,  in  their  Confession  of  Faith,  and  in  various  pub- 
lic documents,  that  they  held,  and  that  their  fathers  before 
them,  for  many  generations,  always  held,  to  infant  bap- 
tism.    The  Petrobrussians,  in  this  respect,  forsook  the 
doctrine  and  practice  of  their  fathers,  and  departed  from 
the  proper  and  established  Waldensian  creed.     If  there 
be  truth  in  the  plainest  records  of  ecclesiastical  history, 
this  is  an  undoubted  fact.     In  short  the  real  state  of  this 
case  may  be  illustrated  by  the  following  representation. 
Suppose  it  were  alleged  that  the  Baptists  in  the  United 
States  are  in  the  habit  of  keeping  the  seventh  day  of  the 
week  as  their  Sabbath?     Would  the  statement  be  true? 
By  no  means.     There  is,  indeed,  a  small  section  of  the 
Antipedobaptist    body  in    the    United    States,   usually 
styled  "Seventh  day  Baptists"--probably  not  a  thirtieth 


118  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

part  of  the  whole  body — who  observe  Saturday  in  each 
week  as  their  Sabbath.  But,  notwithstanding  this,  the 
proper  representation,  no  doubt  is, — (the  only  represen- 
tation that  a  faithful  historian  of  facts  would  pronounce 
correct) — that  the  Baptists  in  this  country,  as  a  general 
body,  observe  "the  Lord's  day"  as  their  Sabbath.  You 
may  rest  assured,  my  friends,  that  this  statement  most 
exactly  illustrates  the  real  fact  with  regard  to  the  Wal- 
denses  as  Pedobaptists.  Twenty-nine  parts,  at  least,  out 
of  thirty,  of  the  whole  of  that  body  of  witnesses  for  the 
truth,  were  undoubtedly  Pedobaptists.  The  remaining 
thirtieth  part  departed  from  the  faith  of  their  fathers  in 
regard  to  baptism,  but  departed  on  principles  altogether 
unlike  those  of  our  modern  Baptist  brethren. 

"I  have  only  one  fact  more  to  state  in  reference  to  the 
pious  Waldenses,  and  that  is,  that  soon  after  the  opening 
of  the  Reformation  by  Luther,  they  sought  intercourse 
with  the  Reformed  churches  of  Geneva  and  France ;  held 
communion  with  them ;  received  ministers  from  them ; 
and  appeared  eager  to  testify  their  respect  and  affection 
for  tliem  as  '  brethren  in  the  Lord.'  Now  it  is  well 
known  that  the  Churches  of  Geneva  and  France,  at  this 
time,  were  in  the  habitual  use  of  infant  baptism.  This 
single  fact  is  sufficient  to  prove  that  the  Waldenses  were 
Pedobaptists.  If  they  had  adopted  the  doctrine  of  our 
Baptist  brethren,  and  laid  the  same  stress  on  it  with  them, 
it  is  manifest  that  such  intercourse  would  have  been 
wholly  out  of  the  question. 

"  If  these  historical  statements  be  correct,  and  that  they 
are  so,  is  just  as  well  attested  as  any  facts  whatever  in 
the  annals  of  the  church,  the  amount  of  the  whole  is 
conclusive,  is  demonstrative,  that,  for  fifteen  hundred 
years   after  Christ,  the  practice  of  infant  baptism  was 


FIFTH   ARGUMENT  119 

universal ;  that  to  this  general  fact  there  was  absolutely 
no  exception,  in  the  whole  Christian  church,  which,  on 
principle,  or  even  analogy,  can  countenance  in  the  least 
degree,  modern  Anti-pedobaptism ;  that  from  the  time  of 
the  Apostles  to  the  time  of  Luther,  the  general,  unop- 
posed, established  practice  of  the  church  was  to  regard 
the  infant  seed  of  believers  as  members  of  the  church, 
and,  as  such  to  baptize  them. 

"  But  this  is  not  all.  If  the  doctrine  of  our  Baptist 
brethren  be  correct;  that  is,  if  infant  baptism  be  a  cor- 
ruption and  a  nullity;  then  it  follows,  from  the  foregoing 
historical  statements,  most  inevitably,  that  the  ordinance 
of  baptism  was  lost  for  fifteen  hundred  years :  yes,  en- 
tirely lost,  from  the  apostolic  age  till  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury. For  there  was  manifestly,  '  no  society,  during 
that  long  period,  of  fifteen  centuries,  but  what  was  in  the 
habit  of  baptizing  infants.'  God  had  no  church,  then, 
in  the  world  for  so  long  a  period.'  Can  this  be  admit- 
ted ?  Surely  not  by  any  one  who  believes  in  the  perpe- 
tuity and  indestructibility  of  the  household  of  faith. 

"  Nay,  if  the  principle  of  our  Baptist  brethren  be  cor- 
rect, the  ordinance  of  baptism  is  irrecoverably  lost  alto- 
gether ;  that  is  irrecoverably  without  a  miracle.  Because 
if,  during  the  long  tract  of  time  that  has  been  mentioned, 
there  was  no  true  baptism  in  the  church ;  and  if  none  but 
baptized  persons  were  capable  of  administering  true  bap- 
tism to  others  ?  the  consequence  is  plain ;  there  is  no  true 
baptism  in  the  world !  But  can  this  be  believed  ?  Can 
we  imagine  that  the  great  Head  of  the  Church  would 
permit  one  of  his  own  precious  ordinances  to  be  banished 
entirely  from  the  church  for  many  centuries,  much  less  to 
be  totally  lost  ?  Surely  the  thought  is  abhorrent  to  every 
Christian  feelinsf. 


120  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

"Such  is  an  epitome  of  the  direct  evidence  in  favor  of 
infant  baptism.  To  me,  I  acknowledge,  it  appears  no- 
thing short  of  demonstration.  The  invariable  character 
of  all  Jehovah's  dealings  and  covenants  vi^ith  the  children 
of  men ;  his  express  appointment,  acted  upon  for  two 
thousand  years  by  the  ancient  church ;  the  total  silence 
of  the  New  Testament  as  to  any  retraction  or  repeal  of 
this  privilege ;  the  evident  and  repeated  examples  of  fam- 
ily baptism  in  the  apostolic  age ;  the  indubitable  testi- 
mony of  the  practice  of  the  whole  church  on  the  Pedo- 
baptist  plan,  from  the  time  of  the  apostles  to  the  six- 
teenth century,  including  the  most  respectable  witnesses 
for  the  truth  in  the  dark  ages ;  all  conspire  to  establish 
on  the  firmest  foundation,  the  membership,  and  the  con- 
sequent right  to  baptism  of  the  infant  seed  of  believers.  If 
here  be  no  divine  warrant,  we  may  despair  of  finding  it 
for  any  institution  in  the  Church  of  God.'" 

'For  this  interesting  history  of  baptism  we  gratefully  acknowledge 
ourselves  indebted  to  Dr.  Miller ; — see  Miller  on  Baptism. 


CHAPTER  XL 

OBJECTIONS   TO   THIS   ARGUMENT. 

First  Objection. — Infant  baptism,  says  the  Rev.  Mr. 
Broaddus,  was  introduced  by  the  Romish  apostacy,  and 
is  a  relic  of  papacy ;  the  Rev.  Mr.  Judson  maintains, 
that  it  was  ingrafted  on  the  church  towards  the  close  of 
the  second  century,  Other  Baptist  authorities  teach, 
that  it  took  its  rise  in  Africa  from  the  first  to  the  middle 
of  the  third  centuries.^ 

Answer. — It  is  somewhat  difficult  to  reply  to  such 
conflicting  opinions,  and  so  long  as  our  adversaries  them- 
selves are  so  at  variance,  no  marvel  that  we  should  take 
the  liberty  to  dissent  from  them  all.  If  Mr.  Broaddus 
and  those  who  assert  with  him,  that  infant  baptism  is  a 
popish  relic,  be  correct,  then  Mr.  Judson  and  others  who 
fix  its  origin  in  the  second  century,  must  necessarily  be 
in  error,  because  popery  did  not  commence  until  the 
sixth  century  ;  and  moreover,  infant  baptism  is  practised 
in  the  Greek  church,  which  never  had  any  connection 
with  the  pope,  so  that  here  we  have  the  difference  of 
"  the  small  matter"  of  only  four  hundred  years  among 
our  Baptist  brethren  themselves.  If  on  the  other  hand, 
Mr.  Judson  is  to  be  believed,  then  of  course  the  testis 
mony  of  all  who  date  the  pretended  innovation  in  the 
third  century,  must  be  rejected.  While  we  leave  these 
gentlemen  to  settle  their  own  disputes  in  their  own  way, 
we  shall  proceed  to  show,  that  they  are  all  mistified  and 

'See  Benedict's  History  of  the  Baptists. 
11 


122  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

groping  their  way  in  darkness.     We  maintain  that  they 
are  all  mistaken. 

1 .  Because  there  is  no  evidence  of  any  kind  whatever, 
to  prove  that  infant  baptism  took  its  rise  as  alleged  above. 
We  have  never  met  with  such  evidence  ;  our  Baptist  bre- 
thren have  never  yet  produced  it,  and  never  can  ;  we 
challenge  them  to  bring  forth  one  particle  of  proof. 

2.  Because,  if  this  ordinance  originated  some  time 
between  the  first  and  the  middle  of  the  third  centuries, 
how  shall  we  account  for  the  fact  that  from  the  time  of 
its  supposed  introduction  until  the  year  416,  the  subject 
was  permitted  to  sleep,  not  exciting  one  word  of  contro- 
versy, nor  awakening  one  solitary  opponent  ?  How 
shall  we  account  for  the  fact,  that  the  Christians  who 
fled  from  Africa  into  Europe,  in  the  year  429,  in  order 
to  escape  the  Vandals,  carried  infant  baptism  with  them 
and  practised  it  universally  ?  How  shall  we  account  for 
the  fact  that  the  first  ecclesiastical  canon  on  the  subject 
in  Europe,  was  as  late  as  the  sixth  century,  and  the  first 
imperial  law  in  the  eighth  century  by  the  emperor  Char- 
lemagne ? — Farther,  if  infant  baptism  was  an  innovation, 
it  must  have  attracted  attention  and  provoked  controver- 
sy, which  would  have  led,  if  not  to  the  suppression  of 
the  error,  yet  to  a  diversity  of  practice  in  the  ancient 
churches.  Our  Baptist  brethren  would  surely  have 
taken  alarm  at  the  horrible  heresy,  and  raised  their 
voice  and  "  pleaded  trumpet-tongued"  for  its  destruc- 
tion. Where  were  they  at  that  eventful  period  of  the 
church,  pregnant  with  such  dreadful  error  ?  was  none — 
not  even  one, — found  faithful  enough  to  utter  a  syllable 
of  remonstrance  ?  Methinks  we  hear  old  father  Tcriv.l- 
I'lan  lift  up  the  voice  of  warning, — but  alas  !  even  he 
taught  that  infants  ought  to  be  baptized  if  "  in  danger  of 


OBJECTIONS.  123 

death,"  and  objected  as  much  to  the  baptism  of  "  unmar- 
ried believers"  as  he  did  to  that  of  children. 

But  here  comes  another  disputant,  who  takes  a  differ- 
ent ground  from  all  whom  we  have  mentioned.  Mr. 
Benedict'  says  :  "  We  date  the  beginning  of  our  denomi- 
nation about  the  year  of  our  Lord,  29  or  30  ;  for  at  that 
period,  John  the  Baptist  began  to  immerse  professed  be- 
lievers in  Jordan  and  Enon,"  &c.  If  such  be  the  case, 
then  we  would  ask,  what  became  of  their  denomination 
afterwards  ?  John  baptized  thousands, — and  tens  of 
thousands  ; — the  apostles  and  their  immediate  successors, 
hundreds  of  thousands  ;  where  were  all  those  myriads 
when  infant  baptism  was  introduced  ? — we  do  not  hear 
that  one — not  even  one  demurred  at  it.  Surely  there 
could  not  have  been  any  important  opposition  to  it  in  all 
Christendom,  in  the  first  centuries,  or  the  annals  of  the 
church  would  furnish  some  account  of  that  opposition, 
and  of  the  controversy  flowing  from  it.  The  dead  si- 
lence on  this  subject,  on  every  page  of  history,  from  the 
day  of  Pentecost  to  the  appearance  of  Peter  de  Bruis^  in 
the  eleventh  or  twelfth  century,  sufficiently  uproots  this 
baseless  theory. 


Second  Objection. — If  infant  baptism  be  established 
by  historical  evidence,  then  can  infant  communion  also, 
for  we  have  equally  as  good  authority  for  the  latter  as 
for  the  former. 

Answer. — We  grant  that  young  children  have  been 
admitted  to  the  eucharist  in  various  parts  of  the  church 

'Benedict's  History  of  the  Baptists,  p.  92. 

^Some  chronologists  maintain  that  it  was  towards  the  close  of  the 
eleventh — and  others  in  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth  century  that 
Peter  de  Bruis  lived ;  both  may  be  right. 


124  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

at  an  early  period  of  its  history.  The  reason  of  this 
abuse,  was  the  erroneous  opinion,  that  a  participation  in 
the  Lord's  supper  was  indispensable  to  salvation.  Even 
dying  persons  as  well  as  children,  were  forced  to  swal- 
low a  crumb  of  bread  saturated  with  wine,  and  in  some 
eases  the  superstition  was  carried  so  far,  that  a  morsel  of 
bread  thus  moistened,  was  thrust  down  the  throats  of 
deceased  persons,  who  had  died  without  partaking  of 
the  ordinance,  for  the  purpose  of  insuring  the  pardon  of 
their  sins  and  their  acceptance  with  God.  This  revolt- 
ing practice  arose  from  a  literal  interpretation  of  the 
words,  "  Except  ye  eat  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  man, 
and  drink  his  blood,  ye  have  no  life  in  you.'"  But  that 
we  have  the  same  authority  for  infant  communion  which 
we  have  for  infant  baptism,  is  an  assertion  as  void  of 
truth  as  it  is  unjust  to  the  cause  we  are  advocating. 

There  is  not  a  particle  of  historical  evidence  for  infant 
communion  until  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  at 
which  time  it  was  introduced  in  some  of  the  African 
churches ;  but  the  testimony  in  favor  of  infant  baptism, 
is  clear,  uniform,  and  comprehensive ;  it  commenced 
with  the  apostolic  age  and  remained  unimpeached  and 
uncontradicted  for  more  than  a  thousand  years.  Moreover, 
the  practice  of  infant  communion  was  very  limited  ;  that 
of  infant  baptism  was  universal ;  the  former  was  opposed 
and  condemned  again  and  again,  the  latter  was  never 
once  resisted  for  fifteen  centuries,  (except  by  the  Petro- 
brussians  in  the  twelfth  century,  who  formed  a  mere 
handful  of  factionists,  but  was  approved  and  inculcated 
in  books  and  councils  time  after  time  ;  the  one  took  its 
rise  nearly  three  hundred  years  after  the  other  had  been 
in  practice  throughout  the  church ;  the  one  was  abolished, 

'  Jolin  vi.  63. 


OBJECTIONS.  125 

in  part,  prior  to  the  reformation,  and  entirely  by  all  the 
reformers  ;  the  other  has  never  been  superseded,  (except 
by  the  Baptists,)  but  was  retained  by  every  one  of  the 
great  lights  of  the  reformation.  The  two  most  distin- 
guished men  of  the  fourth  century,  (the  most  learned  and 
eminent  of  the  age,')  who  had  enjoyed  the  most  favora- 
ble opportunity  of  becoming  acquainted  with  the  whole 
church,  declared  that  they  had  never  heard  of  any  pro- 
fessing Christians  in  the  world,  either  orthodox  or  hete- 
rodox, who  did  not  baptize  their  children ;  but  nothing 
like  this  has  ever  been  testified  in  relation  to  the  intro- 
duction and  practice  of  infant  communion.  Independ- 
ently of  all  this,  there  cannot  be  found  from  Genesis  to 
Revelation  one  particle  of  authority  for  infant  commun- 
ion, whereas,  both  the  Old  and  New  Testament  abound 
with  testimony  in  favor  of  infant  baptism, — testimony  so 
clear  and  conclusive,  that  if  all  other  not  found  in  God's 
word,  were  for  ever  cancelled,  it  would  notwithstanding 
rest  on  a  foundation  firm  as  the  everlasting  hills.  How 
utterly  groundless  then,  the  assertion  that  the  evidence 
for  one  is  as  good  as  that  in  support  of  the  other ! — 
"And  as  a  miserable  superstition  destroyed  it.  When 
transubstantiation  arose  some  time  about  the  eleventh  or 
twelfth  century,  the  sacred  elements  (now  transmuted,  as 
was  supposed,  into  the  real  body  and  blood  of  the  Sa- 
viour) began  to  be  considered  as  too  awful  in  their  char- 
acter to  be  imparted  to  children.  But  in  the  Greek 
church,  who  separated  from  the  Latin  before  transubstan- 
tiation was  established,  the  practice  of  infant  communion 
stdl  continues." 

'Augustine  and  Pelagiue. 
11* 


CHAPTER  XII. 

SIXTH    ARGUMENT. 

The  names  applied  in  the  Neio  Testament  to  small 
children  afford  evidence  of  their  baptism. — The  disci- 
ples of  our  Lord  were  stigmatized  by  his  enemies  as 
Nazarenes,  Heretics,  &c.  but  they  called  themselves 
Christians.  They  added  moreover  the  most  affectionate 
appellations,  such  as,  brother,  sister,  the  called,  the  elect, 
the  illuminated,  holy  persons  or  saints,  faithful,  &c. 
These  names  however,  were  given  to  none  but  church- 
inembers,  and  to  them  they  were  applied  so  soon  as  they 
were  baptized.  The  newly-baptized  were  designated  as 
new-plants.  If  then  we  can  prove  that  any  one  of  these 
titles  was  given  to  small  children,  their  church-member- 
ship, and  with  that  their  baptism,  is  the  undeniable  con- 
sequence. 

1 .  We  find  in  reading  the  New  Testament,  that  holy 
persons,  was  one  of  the  appellations  bestowed  on  church- 
members.'  The  aposde  also  writes  on  various  occasions, 
to  them  "  who  are  sanctified  in  Christ  Jesus,  to  the  called, 
to  the  holy  persons ;^^ — "to  the  holy  persoiis  at  Ephe- 
sus:" — "to  the  holy  persons  at  Colosse;"  "to  all  the 
holy  persons  in  Christ  Jesus  at  Philippi."  Now  it  is 
well  known  that  this  very  same  appellation  is  given  to 
the  children  of  a  church-member :    "Now  are  your  chil- 

'Acts.  xxvi.  10.     T*v  nyictv  saints  or  holy  persons,  Rom.  xv.  25, 


SIXTH    ARGUMENT.  127 

dren  holy,''''^  and  we  challenge  our  opponents  to  refer  to 
a  single  passage  in  Avhich  any  other  than  members  of  the 
church  of  Christ,  are  designated  by  the  term  "holy."  If 
then  little  children  are  declared  by  the  apostle  to  be  holy, 
does  it  not  follow  that  he  regarded  them  as  members,  and 
if  as  members,  must  they  not  have  been  honored  Avith 
the  public  sign  of  membership,  or  in  other  words  have 
been  baptized  ? 

2.  Again,  another  appellation,  given  much  more 
frequently  and  extensively,  to  church-members  was 
"Faithful;"  this  was  one  of  their  distinctive  titles  in 
many  countries  and  during  many  ages.  It  was  applied 
to  individuals  in  the  singidar  f  the  mother  of  Timothy 
is  called  a  Faithful  ;''  it  was  also  applied  in  the  plural ;'' 
it  is  addressed  to  churches  as  communities  ;^  and  when 
Lydia  was  baptized  with  her  family,  she  said:  "if  you 
have  adjudged  me  to  be  a  Faithful,"  &c.  &c.  From 
all  these  examples,  it  is  manifest,  that  to  call  an  individ- 
ual faithful,  in  the  primitive  age,  was  equivalent  to  de- 
nominating him  a  Christian  brother,  or  a  disciple  of 
Jesus  Christ,  or  by  any  other  appellation  denoting  his 
membership  in  the  church.  Now  if  we  can  show  that 
this  same  title  was  given  to  children,  then  we  think  a 
strong  argument  is  made  out.  The  apostle  describing 
the  character  of  a  bishop,  writes:  "he  must  be  the  hus- 

'1  Cor.  vii.  14  aj/a.. 

H  Cor.  iv.  n  ;  Eph.  iv.  21 ;  Col.  iv.  9 ;  1  Peter  v.  12. 

^Acts.  xvi.  1  OTiTTxc  see  also  2  Cor.  vi.  15  what  part  hath  a  faith- 
ful with  a  non-faithful,  and  1  Tun.  v.  16.  If  any  Faithful  (man) 
or  Faithful  (woman,)  &e.  Tr/trrsc  «  TriTTn. 

''Acts.  X.  45  menci;  1  Thn.  vi.  2,  ma-Tur,  1  Tim.  iv.  12;  2  Tim. 
ii.2  ;  Rev.  xii.  14 ;  Eph.  i.  1,  7ri<rTci;:  Col.  i.  2,  tuttok. 

*Eph.  i.  1,  OTfl-To/j;  Col.  i.  2,  ms-rw. 


128  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

band  of  one  wife,  having  children  who  are  faithfuls;'" 
here  then,  the  recognition  by  baptism  of  the  membership 
of  children,  is  charged  on  the  clergy  as  a  duty  ;  and  the 
omission  is  a  marked  disqualification  for  ecclesiastical 
office.  To  contend  that  the  children  alluded  to,  must 
have  been  adults,  because  they  are  supposed  to  have 
been  accusable  of  "  riot  and  unruliness,"  is  a  mere  sub- 
terfuge ,  because,  admitting  some  of  them  were  adults,  it 
does  not  follow  that  all  were  ;  and  even  if  all  were,  they 
must  have  previously  been  infants,  and  they  were  re- 
quired to  be  faithfuls  irrespective  of  age.  Further,  the 
children  of  a  bishop  might  have  been  daughters  only, 
which  it  is  to  be  hoped,  would  have  exonerated  them 
from  the  imputation  of  being  riotous,  and  yet  they  must 
he  faithfuls;  for  the  term  children  includes  both  sexes 
as  well  as  all  ages.  Moreover,  a  bishop  might  have  been 
young  himself,  and  have  had  none  but  little  children,  and 
these  must  be  faithfuls  also,  and  hence  their  member- 
ship and  baptism  follow  beyond  all  possibility  of  refuta- 
tion. In  conformity  to  this  view,  we  read  that  Paul  sent 
his  salutations  to  Priscilla  and  Aquila  *  *  *  and  the 
church  in  their  family  f  also  to  Nymphas  and  the  church 
in  his  family  f  also  to  Philemon  and  the  church  in  his 
family."  And  Chrysostora,  Theodoret  and  Theophylact ; 
also  all  the  Greek  scholiasts,  and  Grotius,  maintain  that 
the  families  of  these  individuals  were  all  made  faith- 
fuls, so  as  to  be  called  churches.^ 

'Titus  i.  6.  The  word  rendered  rmvet.  in  this  passage,  means  ac- 
cording to  the  authority  of  Robinson,  Dr.  Gregory,  and  other  distin- 
guished Baptist  writers  "  minors  from  tiventy  days  old  to  hoenty 
j/ears." 

2Rom.  xvi.  3.  5.  sCol.  iv.  15.  Thil.  i.  2. 

*See  Whitby  in  loc. 


SIXTH    ARGUMENT.  129 

We  might  with  equal  facility  prove,  that  the  term 
newly  planted,  is  also  an  appellation  given  to  church- 
members,  and  applied  to  children,^  but  the  foregoing  is 
sufficient.  We  shall  only  yet  add  a  few  sepulchral  in- 
scriptions of  the  earliest  ages,  by  way  of  confirming  our 
argument. 

ANCIENT   APPLICATION   OF    THE    TERM    "  FAITHFUL "    CON- 
TINUED   TO    CHILDREN. 

"  A  FAITHFUL,  descended  from  ancestors  who  were 
also  FAITHFULS.  Here  lies  Zosimus ;  he  lived  two  years 
one  month  and  twenty-five  days."  This  inscription 
bore  the  symbols  of  the  fish  and  the  anchor,  which  mark 
a  period  of  primitive  and  suffering  Christianity.  The 
following  are  of  the  same  impori : 

Cyriacus,  a  faithful  ;  died  aged  eight  days  less  than 
three  years. 

Eustafia  the  mother,  places  this  in  commemoration 
to  her  son  Folichronia,  a  faithful,  who  lived  three 
years. 

Urcia  Florentina,  a  faithful,  rests  here  in  peace  : 
she  lived  five  years,  eight  months,  and  eight  days. 

ANCIENT    APPLICATION    OF    THE    TERM    "  HOLy"    CONTIN- 
UED   TO    CHILDREN. 

Maurentius,  son  of  Maurentia,  a  most  pleasing  child, 
who  lived  five  years,  eleven  months,  and  two  days : 
worthy  to  repose  in  peace  among  the  holy  persons. 

Sacred  to  the  great  God.  Leopardus  rests  here  in 
peace  with  holy  spirits.  Having  received  baptism,  he 
went  to  the  blessed  innocents.  This  was  placed  by  his 
parents,  with  whom  he  lived  seven  years  and  seven 
months. 

'Rom.  vi.  6,  and  1  Tim.  iii.  6. 


130  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

ANCIENT    APPLICATION    OF    THE     TERM      "  NEOPHYTOs" 

NEWLY  PLANTED CONTINUED    TO    CHILDREN. 

Rufillo,  NEWLY  BAPTIZED,  who  lived  two  years  and 
forty  days.  Quintillian,  the  father,  places  this  to  the 
memory  of  his  most  sweet  son,  who  now  sleeps  in  the 
peace  of  Christ. 

To  Domitius,  an  innocent,  newly  baptized,  who 
lived  three  years  and  thirty  days. 

Valerius  Decentius,  the  father,  places  this  to  his  son 
newly  baptized,  the  well  deserving  Valerius  Vitulia- 
nus,  who  lived  with  his  parents  three  years,  ten  months, 
and  fifteen  days.^ 

'For  these  inscriptions  we  acknowledge  ourselves  indebted  to  the 
Editor  of  Calmet;  in  his  "Facts  and  Evidences,"  &c.  many  more  of 
the  same  tenor  may  be  found. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 


FURTHER   OBJECTIONS. 


We  have  now  presented  the  principal  arguments  on 
this  subject,  and  replied  to  all  the  adverse  reasoning  usu- 
ally relied  on  to  nullify  those  arguments.  A  few  other 
objections  remain  to  be  ansAvered,  which  could  hot,  with- 
out considerable  digression,  be  introduced  in  the  pre- 
ceding investigation.  It  is  further  urged  in  opposition  to 
infant  baptism, — 

1.  That  Christ  was  not  baptized  until  he  was  thirty 
years  of  age. 

Answer. — This  argument,  like  all  others  that  prove 
too  much,  fails  to  prove  any  thing.  If  our  Lord's  ex- 
ample in  this  particular  is  binding,  then  our  Baptist  bre- 
thren, and  all  other  denominations  in  Christendom,  are 
sadly  at  fault,  because  all  administer  baptism  to  adult 
believers  before  they  attain  that  age  ;  then  also  the  best 
Christian  in  the  world,  though  he  profess  the  clearest 
testimony  of  his  acceptance  with  God,  and  offer  the  most 
satisfactory  evidence  of  a  change  of  heart,  and  of  his 
sanctification  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  dare  not  apply  for  or 
receive  this  ordinance,  until  he  is  of  like  age  with  the 
Saviour  when  he  entered  on  his  ministry.  Such  glaring 
inconsistency  and  absurdity  are  sufficiently  refuted  by 
their  simple  statement. 

No  example  is  binding  Avithout  a  command  to  imitate 
it,  and  though  Ave  are  required  to  Avalk  in  Christ's  foot- 


133  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

Steps,  yet  this  requirement  extends  only  to  his  virtues,' 
and  not  to  his  specific  acts ;  if  it  embraced  the  latter, 
then  it  would  be  our  duty  to  walk  on  the  sea,  to  silence 
the  winds,  allay  the  waves,  to  ride  on  no  other  animal 
but  an  ass,  to  have  no  home  of  our  own,  as  "he  had  not 
where  to  lay  his  head,"  to  be  baptized  with  no  other 
water  than  that  of  the  river  Jordan,*  &c. 

But  apart  from  this,  the  baptism  administered  to  Christ, 
and  that  which  he  enjoins  on  his  disciples,  were  two  dis- 
tinct things.  Those  who  were  baptized  by  John,  were 
baptized  over  again  "  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  ;'"* 
not  so  with  those  who  received  Christian  baptism.  The 
ministry  of  John  strictly  speaking,  was  not  a  component 
part  of  the  old  or  of  the  new  dispensation,  but  formed  an 
intermediate  step, — a  transition  from  the  one  to  the 
other ; — it  may  be  said  to  have  constituted  a  dispensa- 
tion, per  se,  that  is,  by  itself, — belonging  neither  to  one 
nor  the  other,  and  yet,  as  a  connecting  link,  uniting  both. 

In  order  however  to  place  this  branch  of  the  subject 
more  fully  before  the  reader,  we  remark  that, — 

First,  the  baptism  of  our  Saviour  did  not  partake  of 
the  character  of  Johri's  baptism,  because — 

1.  John  baptized  his  converts  "unto  repentance;"  if 
the  baptism  administered  to  our  Lord  partook  of  the  na- 
ture of  John's,  he  must  have  previously  repented  of  sin 
— which  is  blasphemous  to  assert. 

2.  John  required  of  the  candidate,  faith  in  the  Messiah 
about  to  come.     If,  therefore,  Christ  was  baptized  with 

'Controlled  by  this  absurd  notion,  Constantine  the  Great,  resolved 
not  to  be  baptized  until  it  could  be  done  at  the  river  Jordan,  and  as 
he  never  came  to  that  place,  he  did  not  receive  that  ordinance  till 
on  his  death-bed.     See  Pierce  on  Baptism. 

''Acts  xix.  1 — 5. 


OBJECTIONS.  133 

John's  baptism,  he  must  have  belived  in  the  Messiah  to 
come,  and  to  this  faith  John  must  have  exhorted  him. 
But  the  absurdity  of  such  a  doctrine  need  not  be  men- 
tioned. 

3.  The  ultimate  design  of  John's  baptism  was  to 
"prepare  the  way  of  the  Lord;"  i.  e.  to  prepare  the 
hearts  of  the  people  for  the  reception  of  the  Messiah. 
But  could  the  proper  import  of  this  baptism  apply  to  the 
Saviour  in  any  form  ? 

Jigain.  The  baptism,  administered  to  Christ  did  not 
partake  of  the  nature  of  Christian  baptisin.     For, 

1.  Christian  baptism  was  not  instituted  until  after  the 
resurrection  of  our  Saviour.  If  therefore,  Christ  re- 
ceived Christian  baptism  the  event  must  have  taken  place 
about  three  years  previous  to  the  actual  institution  of  that 
ordinance, — which  is  absurd  to  suppose. 

2.  Christian  baptism  is  performed  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  Son  and  Holy  Ghost.  But  if  Christ  had  been 
baptized  in  this  profession,  it  would  have  been,  to  say 
the  least,  irrelevant  and  trifling. 

3.  The  import  of  Christian  baptism  is  totally  inappli 
cable  to  the  person  and  character  of  Christ.  For,  bap- 
tism is  both  a  sign  and  seal.  As  a  sign  it  witnesseth  to 
our  inward  washing  and  regeneration  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  which  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  presupposes 
defilement  by  sin.  Remove  the  idea  of  antecedent  pol- 
lution by  sin,  and  you  annihilate  the  grand  intent  of  bap- 
tism as  a  sign.   As  a  seal,  baptism  becomes  the  pledge, — 

(a.)  Of  our  fidelity  to  God. 

(b.)  Of  God's  fidelity  to  us  in  bestowing  the  blessings 
of  the  New  Covenant,  such  as  repentance,  pardon,  regen- 
eration, sanctification,  &c.  Such  then  being  the  true  import 
13 


134  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

of  baptism,  can  any  person,  in  his  sober  senses,  presume 
it  to  be  applicable  to  the  Saviour  of  the  Avorld  ? 
■  What  then  was  the  real  design  of  Christ's  baptism  ? — 
He  himself  furnishes  the  answer:  '■'for  thus  it  becometh 
lis  to  fulfil  all  righteousness."^  In  these  words  our 
Lord  may  be  supposed  to  use  a  slight  metonymy,  putting 
righteousness  for  ordinance  or  institute;  or  he  may  be 
supposed  to  use  righteousness  in  the  sense,  not  of  ordi- 
nance, but  of  the  fulfilment  of  law.  In  either  case  the 
result  would  be  the  same,  and  the  Avhole  clause  may 
therefore  be  better  understood  by  reading  it: — '■'■  For  thus 
it  becometh  us  to  fulfil  every  ordinance." 

But  what  ordinance  or  law,  then  in  vogue,  required 
the  Saviour  to  be  baptized  ? — We  answer ;  he  was  about 
to  enter  upon  ]iis  public  ministry.  He  had  attained  his 
30th  year, — the  age  at  which,  by  the  appointment  of 
God,  the  priests  under  the  law  were  to  undertake  the 
duties  of  their  office, — and  he  was  a  "high  priest."  If 
Ave  examine  the  whole  code  of  Moses,  Ave  shall  find  no 
law  that  required  Christ  to  be  baptized,  at  this  particular 
juncture,  but  the  law  enjoining  and  regulating  priestly  con- 
secration.'^  That  our  Saviour's  baptism  Avas  a  priestly  con- 
secration, is  corroborated  by  all  the  accompanying  cir- 
cumstances I'ecorded  in  evangelical  history.  And  in  addi- 
tion, Ave  Avill  simply  say, — Christ  did  exercise  the  office 
of  a  priest  Avhen  he  purged  the  temple ;  and  Avhen  the 
chief  priests  and  the  elders  demanded  of  him,  on  that 
occasion,  by  Avhat  authority  he  did  these  things,  Christ 
appealed  to  the  baptism  of  John.^  This  is  Avorthy  of 
particular  notice,  as  Christ  evidently  appealed  to  John's 
baptism  for  a  vindication  of  the  authority  he  had  exer- 

'Matt.  iii.  15.  ^j^x.  xxix.  and  Lev.  viii. 

^Matt.  xxi.  12,  23 — 27. 


OBJECTIONS.  135 

cised.  And  had  the  Jews  then  acknowledged  the  bap- 
tism of  John  to  have  been  from  heaven,  our  Saviour 
would  probably  have  replied:  "John  bore  Avitness  of  me 
and  foretold  you  of  my  authority,  and  actually  consecrated 
me  to  the  priestly  office  according  to  your  law."  To 
tliis  the  captious  Jew  could  have  made  no  reply ;  against 
it  he  could  have  uttered  no  complaint.  What  was  done 
among  the  Jews,  by  an  accredited  prophet  of  Jehovah, 
was  as  irreversible  as  the  mandate  of  a  Roman  dictator. 

The  baptism  administered  to  Christ  Avas  accordingly 
not  the  sign  and  seal  of  the  new  covenant,  but  of  his 
mediatorial  office;  of  course  it  is  altogether  irrelevant  to 
tlie  point  at  issue;  it  has  nothing  to  do  with  Christiau 
baptism,  and  ought  not  to  be  forced  into  the  discussion 
either  one  way  or  the  other,  than  as  an  example  of  gen- 
eral obedience  t-o  the  ordinances  of  God's  law.' 

2.  Jigain,  it  is  argued  that  baptism  being  the  seal  of 
a' covenant,  it  is  ivrong  to  bind  a  child  in  a  covenant 
without  its  knoivledge  or  consent. 

Ansaver. — The  covenant  of  Avhich  baptism  is  the  sign 
and  seal,  has  been  in  force,  nearly  forty  centuries,  and 
the  children  of  believing  parents  are  subjects  of  it  by  vir- 
tue of  their  birth  and  not  of  baptism.  They  are  born 
into  the  covenant,  and  the  question  is  not  noA/,  Avhether 
tliey  shall  consent  to  become  a  party  to  it, — they  are  that 
already, — but  Avhether  their  inestimable  birthright  guar- 
anteed in  the  covenant,  shall  be  acknowledged  and  form- 
ally set  forth?  and  surely  to  this  obvious  and  easy  duty, 
no  believing  parent  can  reasonably  object. 

But  if  it  be  Avrong  to  seal  a  covenant  in  behalf  of  an. 
unconscious  child,  Avhereby  it  is  solemnly  devoted  to 
God,  then  the  controversy  is  not  between  the  impugners 

'See  "Der  Besiegte  Weidertaeufer,"  by  Rev.  Mr.  Goering,  p.  66. 


136  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

of  infant  baptism  and  us,  but  between  them  and  Jehovah. 
For  circumcision  was  also  the  seal  of  a  covenant,  and  by 
the  express  command  of  God,  administered  to  babes  of 
eight  days  old — of  course  without  their  knowledge  or 
consent. — The  point  at  issue  therefore,  must  be  settled 
by  our  Baptist  brethren  with  the  God  of  Israel;  for  he 
it  was  who  tirst  constituted  children  the  subjects  of  his 
covenant,  and  commanded  that  they  should  be  the  recipi- 
ents of  a  divine  ordinance  in  token  and  ratification  of  that 
covenant,  and  all  this,  entirely  "without  their  knowledge 
or  consent."  The  objection  before  us  then  lies  just  as 
strongly  against  the  old  as  against  the  new  seal,  but  if  it 
was  right  to  administer  the  former,  how  can  it  be  wrong 
to  administer  the  latter?' 

Further,  this  objection  is  the  legitimate  offspring  of 
mfidelity.  It  is  equally  opposed  to  the  religious  educa- 
tion of  children ;  and  if  followed  out,  would  militate 
against  all  those  restraints,  and  that  instruction  which  the 
word  of  God  enjoins  on  parents.  Nay,  if  the  principle 
of  this  objection  be  correct,  it  is  wrong  to  instil  into  the 
mind  of  our  child  an  abhorrence  of  lying,  theft,  drunk- 
enness, malice  and  murder;  lest  forsooth,  it  should  be 
without  their  consent,  or  inconsistent  with  the  privilege 
of  every  rational  being  to  free  inquiry  and  free  agency ! — 

Again,  are  not  children  frequently  bound  out  by  inden- 
ture to  learn  a  trade,  while  they  are  too  young  to  take 
cognizance  of  or  intelligently  yield  assent  to  the  contract? 
Who  has  ever  questioned  the  propriety  of  such  an  act,  or 

'It  is  worthy  of  remark,  that  Christ  "  laid  his  hands"  on  infants, 
(whicli  was  a  religious  ceremony,  and  is  classed  by  an  inspired  writer 
with  the  most  important  doctrines,  Heb.  vi.  2,)  and  "  blessed  them;" 
and  yet  no  one  will  pretend  that  they  understood,  either  the  import 
of  the  ceremony  or  the  nature  of  the  blessing. 


OBJECTIONS.  137 

denied  to  parents  or  guardians  the  right  to  perform  it? 
Why  then  should  we  not  be  permitted  solemnly  and  in 
accordance  with  God's  own  precept,  to  dedicate  our  off- 
spring to  their  heavenly  Father?  Moreover,  Levi,  when 
yet  in  the  loins  of  his  great  grand-father,  was  tithed,  and 
this  was  a  permanent  memorial  of  the  superiority  of  the 
priesthood  according  to  Melchisedeck  over  that  of  Levi. 
Li  a  civil  point  of  view,  Joshua  and  the  heads  of  Israel 
bound  the  whole  nation  and  its  posterity  in  a  covenant 
established  with  the  Gibeonites,  and  when  Saul,  several 
centuries  afterwards  violated  that  covenant,  the  whole 
people  were  punished  for  it.  Hannah  devoted  her  son  to 
God,  and  bound  him  to  comply  with  all  the  restraints 
peculiar  to  a  Nazarite,  such  as  abstaining  from  wine  and 
intoxicating  liquors,  permitting  his  hair  to  grow,  &;c.  and 
God  was  pleased  with  the  act.  Our  own  children  are  born 
citizens  of  the  state  without  their  knowledge  or  consent, 
and  on  account  of  their  citizenship,  are  subject  to  all  the 
restrictions  incident  to  good  government,  and  obligated  to 
perform  all  the  duties  associated  with  that  relation. 

The  truth  however  of  the  matter  is,  baptism  imposes 
no  restrictions  and  devolves  no  obligations  upon  us,  which 
we  were  not  previously  bound  to  observe.  We  are 
God's  property  and  subjects  by  creation  and  redemption, 
and  owe  him  allegiance  independently  of  baptism.  He 
claims  and  is  entitled  to  our  services  on  other  grounds, 
and  not  one  solitary  liability  is  added  to  the  list  of  our 
antecedent  duties  by  baptism.'  Hence  baptism  does 
not  involve  new  obligations,  but  is  rather  an  exhibition 
and  acknowledgment  of  obligations  previously  existing.* 

'See  "  Der  Besiegte  Wiedertaevifer,"  p.  13. 

^The  declaration  found  1  Pet.  iii.  21  that  "  baptism  is  the  answer 
of  a  good  conscience  towards  God,"  does  not  involve  a  new  obliga- 
12* 


138  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

Away  then  with  the  imscriptural  notion  that  in  baptizing 
our  children,  we  bind  them  in  a  covenant  without  their 
knowledge  or  consent;  if  such  were  even  the  case,  it 
could  form  no  reasonable  ground  of  objection.  But  m 
fact,  there  is  not  an  iota  of  truth  in  the  assertion,  and 
hence  it  is  doubly  preposterous  to  reason  thus  against  a 
divine  institution. — Among  the  many  examples  on  divine 
record,  of  children's  being  bound  in  covenant  with  God, 
without  their  knowledge  and  consent,  we  shall  quote  only 
the  following:  "Ye  stand  this  day  all  of  you  before  the 
Lord  your  God;  your  captains  of  your  tribes,  your  el- 
ders, and  your  officers,  ivlth  all  the  men  of  Israel,  your 
LITTLE  ONES,  your  wivcs,  and  thy  stranger  that  is  in  thy 
camp,  from  the  hewer  of  thy  Avood  unto  the  drawer  of 
thy  water;  that  thou  shouldst  enter  into  covenant  with 
the  Lord  thy  God,  and  into  his  oath,  which  the  Lord  thy 
God  maketh  with  thee  this  day;  that  he  may  establish 
thee  to-day  for  a  people  unto  himself,  and  that  he  may 
be  unto  thee  a  God,  as  he  hath  said  unto  thee,  and  as  he 
hath  sworn  unto  thy  fathers,  to  Abraham,  to  Isaac,  and  to 
Jacob.  Neither  with  you  only  do  I  make  this  covenant 
and  this  oath ;  but  with  him  that  standeth  here  with  us 
this  day  before  the  Lord   our  God,  and  also  avitii  him 

THAT  IS  NOT   HERE  AVITII  XJS  THIS  DAY."' 

3.  It  is  further  urged,  that  ive  cannot  find  in  the 
whole  history  of  the  New  Testament,  a  single  example 
of  the  baptism,  of  children  of  professing  Christians. 

tion,  but  simply  implies  that  baptism  professes  or  presupposes  a  con- 
science tranquil  towards  God  through  (on  account  of)  the  resurrec- 
tion of  Christ; — or  it  may  mean,  that  baptism  recognises  a  covenant 
in  v/hich  we  are  bound  to  preserve  a  conscience  void  of  offence 
towards  God.  But  it  does  not  impose  upon  us  an  obligation  to 
preserve  such  a  conscience, — this  was  our  duty  previously. 
'Deut.  xxix.  10—15. 


OBJECTIONS.  139 

Answer.— Neither  can  Ave  find  in  the  whole  history 
of  the  NeAV  Testament  a  single  example  of  the  baptism 
of  an  adult  born  of  Christian  parents;  on  this  score  then 
our  objection  to  "believer's  baptism"  is  at  least  as  strong 
as  that  of  our  opponents  to  infant  baptism. — It  should  be 
borne  in  mind  that  the  history  of  the  New  Testament 
embraces  a  period  of  more  than  sixty  years  after  the 
introduction  of  the  new  economy.  Now  during  this  time, 
at  least  two  or  three  generations  of  children  arrived  at  the 
age  of  maturity,  and  if  these  thousands  of  children  born 
of  believing  parents,  did  not  receive  the  ordinance  in  their 
infancy,  they  must  have  received  it  in  adult  age,  or  re- 
mained without  it.  The  latter  idea  is  altogether  incred- 
ible. But  upon  the  supposition  that  they  were  not  bap- 
tized in  their  infancy,  have  we  not  a  right  to  demand  of 
our  Baptist  brethren  to  point  out  some  instances  of  their 
baptism  as  adults  ?  Where  do  we  find  on  record  a  soli- 
tary example  of  an  individual  born  of  Christian  parents, 
who  was  baptized  as  a  believing  adult?  what  was  his 
name  ?  where  did  he  reside  ?  who  were  his  parents  ?  The 
fact  is,  during  the  whole  three  score  years  after  the  ascen- 
sion of  Christ,  we  have  not  one  hint  of  the  baptism  of  a 
single  individual  of  this  description.  In  our  opinion  this 
silence  is  no  feeble  argument  in  our  favor. 

That  there  should  be  no  special  record  found  of  the 
baptism  of  little  children,  is  easily  explained.  The  great 
object  of  the  New  Testament  history  is,  to  narrate  the 
progress  of  the  gospel  among  Jews  and  gentiles ;  to  in- 
form us  of  their  conversion  and  addition  to  the  church, 
and  not  to  specify  the  baptism  of  the  children  of  those 
parents  who  had  already  embraced  the  truth.  Accord- 
ingly we  find,  that  all  the  cases  of  baptism  recorded,  are 
those  of  converts  to  Christianity,  and  not  of  such  as 


140  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

already  belonged  to  the  church.  Why  then  should  it  be 
expected  that  the  inspired  writers  would  single  out  cases 
of  the  baptism  of  infants? — That  they  should  receive 
the  token  of  church  membership,  Avas  a  matter  of  course, 
— so  perfectly  natural  that  it  did  not  call  for  express 
record.  No  wonder  then,  that  we  find  no  example  of 
this  kind  registered  in  the  the  history  of  the  apostolic 
church.  Besides,  children  do  not  in  general  attract  par- 
ticular notice ;  but  when  they  advance  in  life,  they  usu- 
ally fill  up  a  more  important  place  in  the  public  eye ; — 
some  become  conspicuous  and  are  extensively  knoAvn  on 
account  of  their  standing  in  society,  their  talents,  their 
skill,  their  philanthropy,  their  wealth,  &c.  and  if  bap- 
tized as  adults,  and  to  adopt  a  common  but  erroneous  form 
of  expression,  thus  '■'■made  disciples  of  Jesus,''''  it  might 
be  expected  to  be  noticed.  But  such  is  not  the  fact,  and 
the  difficulty  is  easily  solved.  There  were  none  such  to 
be  baptized;  the  children  of  Christian  parents  all  re- 
ceived the  ordinance  in  their  infancy ;  none  remained  to 
receive  it  in  manhood,  and  hence  there  is  no  such  record 
to  be  found. 

4.  Once  more,  it  is  urged  that  baptism  can  be  of  no 
benefit  to  children  ;  wliat  good,  says  the  Antipedobap- 
tist,  can  it  do  an  '*  unconscious  babe"  to  sprinkle  a  lit- 
tle water  upon  its  head? 

Answer. — What  good  could  it  do  a  Jewish  child, 
eight  days  old,  to  circumcise  it  ?  The  God  of  Abraham, 
who  is  also  our  God,  must  have  deemed  it  advantageous, 
or  he  would  not  have  required  it;  and  if  circumcision 
was  beneficial  to  the  new-born  stranger,  why  may  not 
baptism  be  so  also  ?  We  have  a  right  to  demand  a  satis- 
factory reply  to  this  interrogatory,  and  inability  to  fur- 
nish such  a  reply,  should  for  ever  seal  the  lips  of  gain- 


OBJECTIONS.  141 

sayers  as  to  the  possibility  of  benefit  accruing  to  children 
from  their  baptism. 

But  if  it  be  asked,  "  Ifliat  profit  is  there  of  circum- 
cision?— we  appeal  to  "the  law  and  the  testimony," 
and  in  the  language  of  an  inspired  apostle,  answer : 
"  Much  every  way  ;"  but  "  what  if  some  (who  had 
been  circumcised  in  their  childhood)  did  not  (afterwards) 
believe  ?  shall  their  unbelief  make  the  faith  of  God  with- 
out effect  ?  God  forbid  :  yea,  let  God  be  true,  but  every 
man  a  liar;'"  "  for  circumcision  verily  profiteth,  if  thou 
keep  the  law  :  but  if  thou  be  a  breaker  of  the  law,  thy 
circumcision  is  made  uncircumcision."'^  In  like  manner, 
if  cavillers  tauntingly  say  :  "  What  profit  is  there  in  bap- 
tizing  your  little  children  ?"  we  answer :  "  Much  every 
V}ay,'" — this  train  of  thought  however,  introduces  us  to 
the  second  branch  of  our  investigation,  in  which  we  pro- 
pose briefly  to  set  forth  the  benefits  of  infant  baptism. 
For  a  full  reply  to  the  last  objection,  we  accordingly  refer 
the  reader  to  Part  II. 

'Rom.  iii.  1 — 4.  ^j^om.  ii.  25, 


INFANT    BAPTISM. 

PART   SECOND. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE    BENEFITS    OF    INFANT    BAPTISM. 

In  exhibiting  these  benefits,  we  shall  limit  ourselves 
to  a  few  ;  our  main  object  is  to  sustain  the  baptism  of 
infants,  and  the  practice  of  administering  it  by  affusion. 
Besides,  though  some  diversity  of  sentiment  prevails  as 
to  the  benefits,  yet  that  diversity  is  not  so  great,  nor  does 
it  at  present  form  a  topic  of  such  general  and  sharp  con- 
tention. We  shall  therefore  discuss  this  branch  of  the 
subject  rather  incidentally,  and  dismiss  it  with  as  little 
delay  as  possible. 

We  do  not  profess  to  know  all  the  advantages  that 
either  accompany  or  follow  the  administration  of  this 
Holy  Sacrament ;  but  there  are  some  obviously  connected 
with  it,  both  directly  and  indirectly,  and  these  we  shall 
now  endeavor  briefly  to  spread  before  our  readers. 

FIRST   benefit. 

1.  Baptism  is  a  sign  of  many  interesting  truths, 
and  a  seal  of  mimerous  and  inestimable  blessings. 

It  is  a  sign  of  many  interesting  truths.  It  holds  up 
to  our  view,  symbolically  indeed,  but  very  impressively. 


144  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

many  of  the  essential  truths  of  the  gospel.  It  exhibits 
us  as  a  fallen,  guilty  and  polluted  race,  who  need  a  reno- 
vation of  our  nature  and  that  sanctification  which  the 
Holy  Spirit  alone  can  accomplish.  It  magnifies  the  wis- 
dom and  love  of  God,  displayed  in  the  glorious  plan  of 
salvation  by  the  atoning  blood  of  the  Saviour  and  the  pu- 
rifying influences  of  his  grace.  It  presents  to  our  minds 
the  solemn  truth,  that  we  "  are  not  our  own,"  but  "  are 
bought  with  a  price  ;"  that  we  are  therefore  the  property 
of  God,  bound  to  be  "  not  the  servants  of  men,"  but  of 
Him  who  redeemed  us,  and  to  "  glorify  him  in  our  body 
and  in  our  spirits,  which  are  his."  It  reminds  us  that 
God  is  our  Father  and  we  are  his  children  ;  that  it  is  his 
benevolent  design  to  restore  us  to  the  likeness  of  his 
image,  and  reinstate  us  in  the  enjoyment  of  his  favor, 
both  which  have  been  forfeited  by  sin  and  disobedience. 
Above  all,  it  is  a  standing  and  incontrovertible  exhibition 
of  the  true  nature  of  the  God-head,  proclaiming  the  De- 
ity to  the  Christian  world,  as  a  Three-one-God  ;  as  a 
Being, — glorious,  unsearchable  and  incomprehensible, — 
one  in  essence  but  three  in  person.  And  so  long  as  bap- 
tism is  taught  and  practised  according  to  the  Scriptures, 
there  is  no  danger  that  the  sacred  and  mysterious  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity  will  be  obliterated  from  the  Chris- 
tian's creed,  or  that  the  homage  which  is  due  alike  to  the 
Father,  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost  will  cease  to  char- 
acterize his  private  and  his  public  devotions. 

It  will  perhaps  be  objected,  that  however  forcibly  all 
tliese  doctrines  are  represented  in  baptism,  yet  the  infant 
subjects  of  it  do  not  understand  them.  Our  reply  is, 
neither  did  they  understand  the  meaning  of  Christ's  lay- 
ing his  hands  on  them,  and  yet  that  very  act  was  accom- 
panied by  a  blessing,  imparted  by  the  Saviour.     Neither 


BENEFITS.  145 

did  Jewish  children  of  eight  days  old  comprehend  the 
sacred  truths  of  which  circumcision  was  the  sign,  and 
yet  it  did  signify  such  truths,  and  it  was  appointed  to  be 
administered  to  such  children.  The  period  will  arrive, 
when  they  shall  be  able,  and  when  it  shall  be  their  duty, 
to  acquaint  themselves  with  them,  and  when  they  may 
rejoice  and  thank  God  for  all  the  advantages  resulting 
from  that  acquaintance.  The  individuals  who  present 
them  in  baptism,  and  the  particular  church  of  which 
they  are  members,  enjoy  the  benefits  of  which  we  are 
speaking,  and  when  in  after  life,  they  are  engaged  in 
educating  and  training  them  up  for  God's  service,  it  will 
be  no  small  advantage  to  remind  the  children  of  those 
important  truths  which  were  thus  solemnly  typified  and 
inculcated  at  their  baptism. 

But  baptism  is  also  a  seal  of  numerous  and  inestima- 
ble  blessings.  Here  all  the  rich  and  ineffable  mercies  of 
the  new  covenant  crowd  upon  our  mind.  In  the  original 
stipulations  of  the  covenant,  these  mercies  were  two-fold, 
temporal  and  spiritual ;  at  present  we  shall  glance  at 
them  only  in  the  latter  point  of  view.  The  engagements 
were  : 

1.  That  God  would  "  greatly  bless"  Abraham,  which 
promise,  as  we  learn  from  Paul,  referred  more  fuUy  to 
the  blessing  of  Abraham's  justification  by  the  recogni- 
tion or  imputation  of  his  faith  for  righteousness,  together 
with  all  the  spiritual  advantages  consequent  upon  the 
relation  which  was  thus  established  between  him  and 
God  in  time  and  eternity. 

2.  That  Abraham  should  be  "  the  father  of  many  na- 
tions," Avhich  we  are  also  taught  by  the  apostle,  to  inter- 
pret more  with  regard  to  his  spiritual  seed,  the  followers 

13 


146  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

of  that  faith  whereof  cometh  justification,  than  to  his 
natural  descendants.' 

3.  That  "  the  land  of  Canaan"  should  be  given  to 
Abraham  and  his  seed,  which  was  manifestly  but  the 
type  of  the  higher  promise  of  a  heavenly  inheritance.^ 

4.  That  God  would  always  be  "  a  God  to  Abraham 
and  his  seed  after  him,"  a  promise  which  is  connected 
with  the  highest  spiritual  blessings,  such  as  the  remis- 
sion of  sins  and  the  sanctification  of  our  nature.  It  is 
even  used  to  express  the  felicitous  state  of  the  church  in 
heaven.^ 

5.  That  in  Abraham's  "  seed  all  the  nations  of  the 
earth  should  be  blessed ;"  and  this  blessing  we  are  ex- 
pressly taught  by  Paul,  was  nothing  less  than  the  justifi- 
cation of  all  nations,  that  is,  of  all  believers  in  all  na- 
tions by  faith  in  Christ." 

Such  are  briefly  the  glorious  blessings  vouchsafed  in 
the  new  covenant,  and  of  all  these  blessings,  baptism  is 
the  appointed  seal,  that  is,  the  testimony  and  pledge  on 
the  part  of  God,  that  they  (the  blessings)  are  his  free 
gift  to  all  believers  and  their  infant  offspring. 

Should  it  be  contended  that  these  benefits  would  be 
bestowed  on  children  independently  of  baptism,  we  only 

'Rom.  iv.  16.  The  expression,  "father  of  us  all,"  evidently 
means,  "  father  of  all  believing  gentiles  as  well  as  Jews." 

^Heb.  xi.  9.  The  "  faith"  spoken  of  in  this  passage,  did  not  refer 
to  the  fulfilment  of  the  temporal  promise ;  for  the  apostle  adds,  Heb. 
xi.  19,  "  they  looked  for  a  city  which  had  foundations,  whose  builder 
and  maker  is  God." 

3Rev.  xxi.  3. 

••Gal.  iii.  8 — 9.  To  be  "  blessed  with  believing  Abraham,"  as  ex- 
pressed in  v.  9,  imports  that  they  receive  the  same  blessing,  which 
is  justification,  and  that  by  the  same  means,  which  is  faith. 


BENEFITS.  147 

reply,  that  they  could  also  liave  been  conferred  on  He- 
brew children  independently  of  circumcision,  and  yet  an 
infinitely  wise  God  required  them  to  be  circumcised  in 
ratification  thereof.  If  it  be  further  objected,  that  in  nu- 
merous cases,  the  professing  parents  who  present  the 
children  for  baptism,  have  not  true  faith,  and  cannot 
therefore  consistently  covenant  for  their  children  ;  our 
answer  is,  that  such  was  doubtless  the  case  under  the 
old  economy,  and  yet  we  are  not  justifiable  in  believing 
that  circumcision  was  in  such  cases  unavailable.  More- 
over, the  same  objection  may  be  urged  in  reference  to  the 
benefits  said  to  be  connected  with  adult  baptism  ;  for  its 
subjects  are  by  no  means  in  every  instance  sincere  in 
their  professions,  and  yet  this  want  of  sincerity  forms  no 
argument  against  the  advantages  of  the  ordinance  in  rela- 
tion to  adults  ;  why  then  should  it  in  respect  to  the  chil- 
dren of  formal  professors  ?  The  baptized  children  of 
such  parents  are  at  least  brought  within  the  care,  the 
watch  and  the  privileges  of  the  church,  which  is  a  very 
important  advantage,  and  has  no  doubt  often  been  blessed 
to  their  eternal  salvation,  while  the  hypocritical  parents 
themselves  have  gone  down  to  everlasting  burnings. 
Where  is  the  faithful  pastor  who  has  not  beheld  the  aw- 
ful truth  of  this  remark  more  than  once  signally  exem- 
plijied  ?  But  this  is  a  distinct  benefit  of  infant  baptism, 
and  deserves  more  extended  notice. 

SECOND    BENEFIT. 

Baptism  is  a  solemn  dedication  of  our  children  to 
God  by  an  appropriate  rite  of  his  own  appointment.-— 
Our  children  are  the  rightful  property  of  Jehovah,  by 
creation,  covenant  and  redemption.  It  is  therefore  our 
duty  to  dedicate  them  to  his  service.     This  may  indeed 


148  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

be  done  privately,  and  apart  from  baptism.  But  in  his 
infinite  wisdom  and  mercy,  our  heavenly  Father  ap- 
pointed a  special  ordinance  peculiarly  adapted  to  this  sa- 
cred duty,  and  every  way  calculated  to  enstamp  upon  its 
performance  the  highest  degree  of  solemnity  and  impres- 
siveness.  This  ordinance  was  formerly  circumcision, 
under  the  New  Testament  it  is  baptism.  And  is  there 
no  advantage  either  to  parents  or  to  children  in  thus 
openly  surrendering  them  up  to  God,  and  formally  devo- 
ting them  to  his  service  in  his  own  appointed  way,  and 
by  his  own  ordained  rite  ?  Is  there  no  advantage  in  re- 
cognizing by  an  act  of  religion,  God's  claim  to  our  off- 
spring, and  our  covenant  engagement  to  bring  them  up 
"  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord?"  Is  there 
no  advantage,  during  the  subsequent  process  of  edu- 
cating them,  to  be  able  to  remind  them,  that  at  the  early 
dawn  of  life,  they  were  religiously  consecrated  to  their 
heavenly  Parent,  solemnly  obligated  to  renounce  "the 
world,  the  flesh  and  the  devil,"  and  to  walk  in  the  way 
of  his  commandments,  and  that  they  therefore  belong  to 
the  Most  High  by  holy  and  irrevocable  transfer,  as  well 
as  by  various  other  sacred  ties  ? — And  should  these  pre- 
cious immortals  take  their  speedy  flight  to  realms  of  end- 
less day,  soon  after  they  have  alighted  in  this  wilderness 
world,  will  there  be  no  comfort  in  the  reflection,  that  they 
were  in  a  peculiar  manner,  and  by  a  religious  and  di- 
vinely appointed  ordinance,  given  to  Him  ivho  gave 
himself  for  them  and  loved  them,  even  unto  death? — 
Verily,  those  who  carelessly  neglect  the  baptism  of  their 
offspring,  do  not  consider  what  a  rich  chalice  of  consola- 
tion-they  dash  from  their  lips,  and  what  a  mighty  lever 
of  moral  influence  they  deprive  themselves  of  in  refer- 
ence to  mcitements  to  personal  duty,  as  well  as  in  secur- 


BENEFITS.  149 

ing  obedience  from  their  children.  They  may  imagine 
the  offence  a  venial  one  because  infant  baptism  is  a 
mooted  point,  but  it  is  an  impeachment  of  God's  perfec- 
tions,— a  setting  up  of  their  own  "  foolishness"  against 
his  unerring  wisdom, — a  delinquency  which  may  plant  a 
thorn  in  their  dying  pillow,  and  give  increased  pungency 
to  the  reproaches  of  a  guilty  conscience,  in  a  world  of 
unmitigated  despair. 


13* 


CHAPTER  II. 


THIRD    BENEFIT. 


It  has  already  been  shown,  that  wlien  a  child  is  bap- 
tized, its  right  of  membership  in  the  visible  church  is 
recognized  and  ratified ;  and  this  baptismal  recognition 
and  ratification  (without  which,  according  to  the  tenor 
of  the  covenant,  it  would  "be  cut  off"  from  God's  peo- 
ple,) secures  several  inestimable  benefits. 

1.  One  of  these  benefits  is,  the  special  instruction  and 
supervision  of  the  church  and  its  pastor. — Litde  chil- 
dren are  generally,  and  they  should  be  invariably,  the 
peculiar  objects  of  parental  solicitude.  Parents  are  com- 
manded to  "train  them  up  in  the  way  in  which  they  should 
go;"  and  were  all  parents  and  guardians  duly  penetrated 
with  a  sense  of  this  duty,  and  qualified  by  grace  and  wis- 
dom to  discharge  it,  ecclesiastical  and  ministerial  vigi- 
lance and  instruction  in  relation  to  infant  members,  might 
not  be  considered  so  important  a  benefit.  But  many  pa- 
rents are  unfortunately  not  qualified  by  grace,  and  some 
who  are  not  inattentive  as  to  their  own  personal  salva- 
tion, are  nevertheless  unskilful  and  not  "  apt  to  teach." 
Does  it  not  then  devolve  upon  the  church  and  its  pastor, 
to  supply  as  far  as  in  them  lies,  this  great  lack  of  service 
on  the  part  of  parents  and  guardians  ? — It  most  unques- 
tionably does ;  for  when  children  are  baptized,  they  are 
thereby  recognized  as  belonging  to  the  church  ;  they  are 
as  it  were  solemnly  entered  as  scholars  or  disciples  in  the 


BENEFITS.  151 

school  of  Christ.  They  are  brought  into  a  situation  in 
which  they  not  only  may  be  trained  up  for  God,  but  in 
which  the  church  no  less  than  the  parents  are  hound  so 
to  train  them  up.  Yes,  the  church, — the  church  is  re- 
quired, by  the  most  sacred  obligations  to  her  covenant 
Head  and  to  her  infant  members,  to  make  ample  provis- 
ion for  the  religious  supervision  and  Christian  education 
of  the  rising  generation. 

Every  adult  member  should  feel  an  interest  in  the  wel- 
fare of  the  children,  and  afford  by  his  example,  exhorta- 
tions and  prayers,  all  needful  aid  to  them.  It  is  incum- 
bent upon  the  officers  of  the  church  especially,  to  have  a 
constant  eye  to  this  important  matter.  It  is  their  duty  to 
look  after  the  children  Avhose  parents  neglect  them,  to 
follow  them  in  their  wild  retreats,  reprove  and  ad- 
monish and  win  them  over  to  the  side  of  virtue  by  gen- 
de  treatment  and  persevering  efforts.  The  pastor  is 
under  sacred  obligations  to  visit  the  families  of  his  church, 
and  both  privately  and  publicly  instruct  the  young,  to 
take  them  by  the  hand  and  lead  them  in  the  way  ever- 
lasting, infusing  into  their  minds  that  light  and  know- 
ledge, so  necessary  to  qualify  them  for  usefulness  and 
happiness  in  this  world,  and  for  the  enjoyment  of  eternal 
felicity  in  the  world  to  come.  And  will  no  advantage 
arise  to  infant  members,  from  the  discharge  of  these  obli- 
gations on  the  part  of  the  church? — "We  speak  as  unto 
wise  men,  judge  ye." 

It  may  perhaps  be  urged  that  these  duties  are  not 
faithfully  performed  by  the  church, — suppose  they  are 
not,  this  is  only  an  objection  to  the  delinquency  of  the 
church  and  not  to  the  benefits  of  infant  baptism.  Con- 
ceive of  a  Christian  association  in  which  the  standard  of 
piety  is  duly  elevated,  and  its  professors  are  what  the 


152  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

gospel  requires  them  to  be, — a  peculiar  people,  adorning 
their  profession  by  a  well  ordered  life  and  conversation, 
and  distinguished  for  their  zeal  in  the  instruction  of  the 
young  and  the  conversion  of  their  souls,  and  then  say 
whether  the  religious  instruction  alluded  to,  is  of  no 
value  ? 

2.  Another  benefit  of  infant  baptism  as  a  seal  of  mem- 
bership, results  from  the  exercise  of  church  discipline. 
We  will  not  stop  here,  to  prove  that  every  particular 
church  is  required  to  watch  over  the  purity  of  its  mem- 
bers ;  to  counsel,  exhort  and  reprove  the  offending ;  to 
comfort  the  distressed  ;  strengthen  the  weak ;  reclaim 
the  backslider ;  to  cut  off  or  suspend  those  who  will  not 
reform  ;  to  restore  the  penitent,  &c.  &c.  All  this  will 
be  admitted  by  most  of  our  readers  without  further  proof; 
besides,  this  is  not  the  proper  place  to  investigate  the 
question  of  church  discipline.  All  we  wish  to  say  at 
present  is,  that  infant  members  are  entitled  to  share  in  the 
advantages  of  such  discipline;  like  the  subjects  of  cir- 
cumcision they  "must  naturally  (says  Prof.  Schmucker) 
enter  on  the  enjoyment  of  these  privileges  by  degrees,  as 
the  powers  of  their  minds  are  developed.  Yet  does  their 
participation  in  them  commence  in  their  earliest  years,  as 
soon  as  they  are  capable  of  being  assembled  for  instruc- 
tion by  their  pastor ;  whilst  the  unbaptized  are  not  neces- 
sarily, nor  by  virtue  of  any  positive  institution,  brought 
under  such  influence  at  any  particular  age  during  their 
intellectual  minority,  nor  afterwards  until  they  apply 
for  admission  to  church-membership.  The  children  of 
the  church  are  regarded  as,  in  some  sense,  under  the 
religious  supervision  of  the  church,  and  in  our  Formula 
of  church  government,'  it  is  expressly  enjoined  on  pas- 

'Chap.  iv.  10. 


BENEFITS.  153 

tors,  to  instruct  them  in  the  elementary  principles  of  reli- 
gion, and  on  the  church  council'  to  exert  themselves  to 
provide  suitable  and  religiously  conducted  schools,  to 
which  they  may  be  sent.  They  are  thus  early  informed 
of  their  relation  to  the  church,  and  of  their  obligation  at 
a  reasonable  age  personally  to  assume,  and  publicly  to 
confirm  the  promises,  made  for  them  at  their  baptism. 
Thus,  in  a  well  regulated  church,  the  great  subject  of 
embracing  Christ  is  necessarily  brought  before  the  minds 
of  all  those  who  had  been  baptized  in  infancy ;  presented 
too  in  the  most  solemn  and  direct  manner,  commended  by 
the  strong  influence  of  religious  education,  of  filial  attach- 
ment, and  of  early  associations ;  whilst  a  very  small  pro- 
portion of  those,  who  grow  up  without  the  pales  of  the 
church,  are  ever  placed  under  such  advantageous  circum- 
stances."^ 
'Chap.  iv.  10.  ^gge  Schmucker's  Theology,  p.  225,  226. 


CHAPTER  III. 

FOURTH    BENEFIT. 

Baptism  secures  to  infants  the  immediate  and  es- 
pecial blessing  of  the  Saviour. — Our  Lord  evinced,  on 
more  than  one  occasion,  during  his  visible  residence  on 
earth,  a  peculiar  regard  for  little  children.  He  was  not 
only  "much  displeased"  when  his  disciples  attempted 
to  prevent  them  from  being  "brought  to  him,"  but  posi- 
tively commanded  that  they  should  be  suffered  to  come 
and  not  be  forbidden.  And  when  they  were  presented, 
he  kindly  took  them  up  in  his  arms,  and  prompted  by 
the  glowing  affection  and  overflowing  benevolence  of  his 
divine  nature,  he  put  his  hands  upon,  and  blessed  them. 
Here  it  must  be  borne  in  mind,  that  "laying  on  hands," 
was,  to  say  the  least  a  very  ancient  and  venerable  prac- 
tice; and  is,  in  the  New  Testament,  ranked  with  "bap- 
tisms, the  resurection  of  the  dead  and  eternal  judgment."' 
Our  Saviour  observed  this  custom  when  he  healed  the 
sick,  as  well  as  when  he  conferred  his  blessing  on  chil- 
dren; the  apostles  likewise  laid  hands  on  those  upon 
whom  they  bestowed  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  the  ceremony, 
on  whatever  occasion  it  was  employed,  seemed  to  be  a 
concomitant  of  the  communication  of  some  special  grace 
or  blessing.  The  precise  nature  and  extent  of  the  bless- 
ing imparted  by  our  Lord  to  the  children  by  the  imposi- 
tion of  his  hands,  it  is  neither  possible  nor  important  to 

>Heb.  vi.  2. 


BENEFITS.  155 

our  purpose  to  decide;  but  it  is  very  certain  that  a  bless- 
ing was  conferred,  because  it  is  positively  declared  that 
"he  laid  his  hands  upon  them,  and  blessed  them." 

Now  in  baptism,  we  emphatically  and  in  strict  con- 
formity to  his  own  precept,  bring  our  children  to  Christ; 
we  literally  present  them  to  him,  laying  them,  as  it  were, 
upon  his  arms,  that  he  may  make  them  the  happy  recip- 
■ients  of  his  special  favor.  This  whole  transaction  is 
deeply  impressive  and  of  most  significant  character;  it 
comprehends  a  solemn  consecration  of  the  infant  to  the 
service  of  Jesus  Christ;  a  recognition  of  its  title  to  all 
the  grace  of  the  new  covenant ;  a  symbolical  exhibition 
of  the  regenerating  influences  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  &c. 
&c.,  and  is  withal  connected  with  believing  and  fervent 
prayer  in  its  behalf.  To  all  this  must  be  added  the  re- 
spect which  God  bears  to  the  believing  act  of  the  parents 
as  well  as  to  their  cordial  prayers  on  the  occasion,  in  both 
which  the  child  is  interested ;  as  well  as  in  that  solemn 
engagement  which  the  right  necessarily  implies,  to  bring 
up  their  children  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the 
Lord. — Can  it  be  reasonably  supposed  that  no  divine 
blessing  is  imparted  on  such  an  occasion,  or  that  the 
blessing  is  merely  nominal  and  not  substantial  and  effica- 
cious ?  Is  it  to  be  believed  that  He  who  in  the  days  of 
his  flesh,  said:  "sufier  little  children  to  come  unto  me," 
and  when  brought,  "  laid  his  hands  upon  them,  and 
blessed  them,""  will  withhold  his  blessing,  when  in  the 
present  day,  we  offer  our  little  ones  to  him  in  the  sacra- 
ment of  baptism?— ^e/ieue  it  ivho  can.'— Here  then,  we 
have  another  important  benefit  secured  to  children  bv 
their  baptism. 

AVc  have  already  remarked,  that  we  do  not  feel  war- 
ranted to  define  the  nature  and  measure  of  this  blessin<r. 


156  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

It  may  be  for  aught  we  know,  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
"  in  those  secret  spiritual  influences  by  which  the  actual 
regeneration  of  those  children  who  die  in  infancy  is 
effected ;  and  which  is  a  seed  of  life  in  those  who  are 
spared,  to  prepare  them  for  instruction  in  the  word  of 
God,  as  they  are  taught  it  by  parental  care,  to  incline 
their  will  and  afi'ections  to  good,  and  to  begin  and  main- 
tain in  them  the  war  against  inward  and  outward  evil,  so 
that  they  may  be  divinely  assisted,  as  reason  strengthens, 
to  make  their  calling  and  election  sure.'"  In  partial  ac- 
cordance with  this  view.  Dr.  Miller  observes,  "A  gra- 
cious God  may,  even  then,  (at  the  moment  in  which  the 
ordinance  is  administered)  accompany  the  outward  em- 
blem with  the  blessing  which  it  represents,  even  the 
washing  of  regeneration,  and  the  renewing  of  the  Holy 
Ghost." — This  idea  acquires  strength  from  the  following 
considerations. 

1.  Revealed  truth  is  not  only  lucidly  typified,  but  also 
actually  employed  in  the  administration  of  baptism,  and 
it  is  through  the  instrumentality  of  such  truth  that  the 
Spirit  operates,  and  the  sincere  use  of  which  he  never 
fails  more  or  less  to  attend  by  his  gracious  influences. 

2.  Baptism  is  in  an  eminent  degree  the  emblem  of 
moral  purification  by  the  new  birth, ^  and  may  even  be- 
come the  blessed  means  of  that  birth.^  But  the  uniform 
agent  in  eflTecting  the  new  birth  is  none  other  than  the 
Holy  Spirit.     These  remarks  appear  to  favor  the  notion 

'See  Watson,  p.  48.  ^Tiins,  xiii.  5  ;  1  Peter,  iii.  21. 

^When  among  the  primitive  Christians,  an  adult  was  baptized,  he 
was  always  presumed  to  be  regenerated,  and  it  was  upon  the 
strength  of  this  presumption,  that  the  ordinance  was  administered  ; 
and  hence,  to  be  regenerated,  and  to  be  baptized,  were  considered  to 
be  one  and  the  same  thing ;  and  in  process  of  time  regeneration  and 
baptism  became  convertible  terms  or  were  used  synonymously. 


BENEFITS.  157 

that  the  influences  of  the  Spirit  may  possibly  constitute 
the  blessing  conveyed  to  children  at  their  baptism.  That 
those  influences  become  immediately  active,  is  not  main- 
tained by  us,  because  the  infant  is  not  as  yet  a  moral 
agent  or  capable  of  intelligent  and  responsible  action  ; 
but  so  soon  as  he  arrives  at  the  age  of  discretion,  he  may 
seriously  meditate  on  his  relations  as  a  member  of  the 
church,  and  the  blessing  imparted  at  his  baptism  may 
become  efl^ectual  to  his  conversion  and  salvation  ;  or  if 
he  die  before  he  reaches  that  age,  the  same  blessing  may 
become  alike  efficient  in  renewing  his  nature  and  quali- 
fying him  for  heaven. 

FIFTH    BENEFIT. 

5.  The  fifth  and  last  benefit  of  infant  baptism  which 
we  will  mention,  has  respect  to  the  parents.  It  renews 
the  assurance  to  them  that  God  is  not  only  their  God, 
but  also  "  the  God  of  their  seed''''  after  them;  and  is  a 
consoling  pledge  that  their  dying  infant  offspring  shall 
be  saved  ;  since  he  Avho  says  :  "  Suffer  little  children  to 
come  unto  me,"  also  adds :  "  for  of  such  is  the  king- 
dom of  heaven."  They  are  further  reminded  of  the 
necessity  of  acquainting  themselves  with  God's  cove- 
nant, that  they  may  diligently  teach  it  to  their  children  ; 
and  that,  as  they  have  covenanted  with  God  for  their 
children,  they  are  bound  thereby  to  enforce  the  cove- 
nant conditions  upon  them  as  they  come  to  years — by 
example  as  well  as  by  education  ;  by  prayer  as  well  as 
by  a  profession  of  the  name  of  Christ. 

Let  parents  think  of  all  this,  when  they  come  to  pre- 
sent their  children  in  this  holy  ordinance.  And  let  chil- 
dren lay  all  this  to  heart,  as  soon  as  they  attain  to  the 
age  in  which  they  are  capable  of  remembering  and  real- 
izing their  solemn  responsibility. 
14 


INFANT    BAPTISM 
PART   THIRD. 


THE  MODE  OF  BAPTISM. 

CHAPTER  I. 

Before  we  proceed  to  our  main  argument  on  this 
branch  of  the  subject,  we  must  be  allowed  to  premise  a 
few  general  remarks. 

1.  It  is  well  understood  that  a  difference  of  opinion 
exists  between  our  Baptist  brethren  and  the  great  mass 
of  the  Christian  world,  in  relation  to  the  mode  of  bap- 
tism ;  the  former  believing  that  it  is  essential  to  admin- 
ister it  by  submersion  or  total  plunging  in  water,  while 
the  latter  maintain  that  the  mode  by  aspersion  or  sprink- 
ling, is  not  only  Scriptural  and  consistent  with  the  best 
usage  of  the  church  of  Christ,  but  also  decidedly  more 
suitable  and  edifying  than  the  other.  But  it  is  not  so 
generally  known,  that  while  the  numerous  millions  of 
Christians  who  hold  to  the  latter  method,  have  no  dis- 
pute whatever  as  to  the  precise  manner  in  which  the  act 
of  aspersion  is  performed,  submersionists  do  differ  very 
materially  among  themselves  ;  some  teaching  that  a  sin- 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  159 

gle  plunge  under  tlie  water  is  sufficient,  and  others  con- 
tending, with  the  Geek  church,  that  trine  immersion  is 
absolutely  necessary.  The  "  Tunkers"  (Dippers,  usu- 
ally called  Dunkards)  insist  on  an  entire  triple  immer- 
sion by  d.  forward  motion  of  the  sul)ject,  but  in  the  judg- 
ment of  the  great  Corypheus'  of  another  sect,  this  mode 
is  nugatory,  inasmuch  as  it  does  not  resemble  the  burial 
of  Christ ;  "  we  must,"  says  he,  "  dip  only  once,  and 
the  motion  must  be  backivards.^^  The  advocates  of 
these  conflicting  practices,  ought  at  least  to  adjust  their 
own  disputes  and  settle  down  on  some  one  specific 
mode,  before  they  can  reasonably  expect  us  who  prefer 
aspersion,  to  renounce  our  present  views  and  embrace 
theirs. 

2.  The  proportion  of  the  Christian  Avorld  avIio  prac- 
tise submersion,  is  exceedingly  small.  The  Romish 
church,  comprehending  a  population  of  perhaps  one 
hundred  and  thirty  millions,  advocate  affusion  ;  and  the 
Greek  church,  amounting  to  more  than  half  that  num- 
ber,- while  they  baptize  children,  difler  from  most  others 
in  that  they  unite  the  two  modes.  Deylingius  says  : 
"  The  Greek  church  practises  affusion  after  immersion,"^ 
that  is,  they  first  immerse  the  subject  three  times,  and 
then  sprinkle  him  ;  hence  they  cannot  justly  be  cited 
in  exclusive  support  of  either  mode.  The  Protestant 
church  is  said  to  contain  some  sixty  millions  of  mem- 

'  Alexander  Campbell. 

^In  a  late  number  of  the  New  York  Observer  a  distinguished 
writer  estimates  the  Greek  and  Papal  churches  at  two  hundred  and 
fifty  millions. 

-'See  Editor  of  Calmet,  p.  74,  in  reference  to  Booth,  vol.  i.  286. 
We  ourselves  once  witnessed  the  baptism  of  an  infant  in  the  great 
cathedral  in  St.  Petersburg  by  pouring ;  the  trine  inmiersion,  we 
presumed,  had  been  pieviously  performed. 


160  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

bers,  and  of  all  these,  probably  not  one-sixtieth  part  prac- 
tise submersion.  Omitting  the  Greek  church  then,  in  the 
estimate,  the  number  who  hold  to  plunging,  compared 
with  those  who  consider  sprinkling  more  correct,  is  in 
the  ratio  of  perhaps  less  than  a  'million  to  nearly  two 
hundred  millions,  or  as  one  is  to  two  lumdred.  We 
mention  this  fact  more  as  a  matter  of  information,  than 
Avith  a  view  to  lay  stress  on  it  as  an  argument. 

3.  Though  infant  baptism  has  no  necessary  connec- 
tion with  the  mode  of  its  administration,  yet  it  is  worthy 
of  notice  that  all  those  who  have  adopted  the  former, 
regard  sprinkling,  and  those  who  have  opposed  it,  ac- 
count submersion,  as  the  proper  mode.  The  Greek 
church,  so  far  as  we  know,  is  the  only  exception,  and 
even  they,  as  just  remarked,  conjoin  both  methods. 
But  every  branch  of  Christendom  that  practise  allusion, 
also  teach  infant  baptism.  These  two  appear,  in  some 
way,  to  be  almost  inseparable  ;  Avhy  it  is  so,  it  may  be 
difficult  to  explain.  It  would  therefore  seem  that  if 
either  can  be  proven  to  be  accordant  with  Scripture,  the 
other  by  common  consent,  follows  as  a  natural  conse- 
quence ;  certainly  if  baptism  by  affusion  be  valid,  then 
the  universal  practice  of  the  world  has  decided  that  in- 
fants should  not  be  excluded. 

4.  There  is  one  repulsive  fact  in  the  early  history  of 
baptism  which  it  is  necessary  to  mention,  as  we  shall 
have  occasion  to  make  use  of  it  in  the  course  of  this  in- 
vestigation, but  which  it  is  difficult  to  speak  of  without 
infringing  on  the  restraints  of  delicacy,  or  seeming  to 
cast  ridicule  on  the  primitive  mode  of  administering  the 
solemn  ordinance  in  question.  We  allude  to  the  circum- 
stance, that  as  early  at  least  as  the  third  century,  and  in 
subsequent  ages  when  the  mode  of  baptism   by  submer- 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  161 

sion  became  more  prevalent,  the  candidate  for  baptism 
was,  irrespective  of  age  or  sex,  divested  of  all  cloth- 
ing- ;  we  wish  to  be  understood  and  must  therefore  speak 
out ;  we  mean,  people  were  baptized  in  a  state  of  perfect 
nakedness,  not  even  having  an  outer  garment  or  a  single 
shred  of  apparel  on.  "  No  exception,"  says  Dr.  Miller, 
"  was  allowed  in  any  case,  even  when  the  most  timid 
and  delicate  female  importunately  desired  it.  This  fact 
is  established,  not  only  by  the  most  direct  and  unequivo- 
cal statements,  and  that  by  a  number  of  writers,  but  also 
by  the  narration  of  a  number  of  curious  particulars  con- 
nected with  this  practice."  It  is  notorious,  (says  Dr. 
Stuart,')  and  admits  of  no  contradiction,  that  baptism  of 
those  days  of  immersion,  was  administered  to  men,  wo- 
men and  children,  in  puris  naturalibis,  naked  as  Adam 
and  Eve  before  their  fall,  &;c.  &c.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem 
testifies  the  same  thing,  "  as  soon  as  ye  came  into  the 
baptistery,  ye  put  off  your  clothes  *  *  *  and  being 
thus  divested,  ye  stood  imitating  Christ  who  was  naked 
upon  the  cross.  *  *  *  A  wonderful  thing  !  ye  Avere 
naked  in  the  sight  of  men  and  were  not  ashamed,*  &;c. 
&c.  The  testimony  of  the  Baptist  historian,  Robinson, 
is  clear  on  this  subject;  he  says,^  "  Let  it  be  observed, 
that  the  primitive  Christians  baptized  naked.  Nothing 
is  easier  than  to  give  proof  of  this  by  quotations  from 
authentic  writings  of  the  men  who  administered  baptism, 
and  who  certainly  knew  in  what  Avay  they  themselves 
performed  it.  There  is  no  historical  fact  better  authen- 
ticated than  this.  The  evidence  doth  not  go  on  the 
meaning  of  the  single  word  naked ;  for  then  a  reader 

'See  Bib.  Rep.  No.  18,  p.  380. 
"Catch.  Myst.  2.  ^chap.  xv.  p.  85. 

14* 


162  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

might  suspect  allegory  :  but  on  many  facts^  reported, 
and  many  reasons  assigned  for  the  practice.  The  rea- 
sons assigned  for  this  practice  are,  that  Christians  ought 
to  put  oft'  the  old  man  before  they  put  on  a  profession  of 
Christianity ;  that  as  men  came  naked  into  the  world, 
so  they  ought  to  come  naked  into  the  church  ;  for  rich 
men  could  not  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ;  that  it  was 
an  imitation  of  Christ,  who  laid  aside  his  glory,  and 
made  himself  of  no  reputation  for  them  ;  and  that  Adam 
had  forfeited  all,  and  Christians  ought  to  profess  to  be 
restored  to  the  enjoyment  of  all,  only  by  Jesus  Christ. 
That  most  learned  and  accurate  historian,  James  Bas- 
iiage,  than  whom  no  man  understood  church  history  bet- 
ter, says,  '  Jflien  artists  threw  garments  over  pictures 
of  the  baptized,  they  consulted  the  taste  of  spectators 
more  than  the  truth  of  the  fact.'  "  So  far  Robinson. 
And  Basnage  might  have  added,  that  all  the  truly  an- 
cient representations  of  baptism  which  he  had  ever  seen, 
represented  the  person  receiving  baptism,  as  absolutely 
naked :  not  even  a  wrapper  around  the  middle  was 
thought  of,  till  after  the  simplicity  of  the  gospel  was  con- 
siderably vitiated.  It  was  because  the  case  is  so  clear, 
that  Robinson  gave  no  additional  quotations  ;  and  Dr. 
Wall  was  influenced  by  the  same  consideration.  His 
words  are,  "  The  ancient  Christians,  when  they  were 
baptized  by  immersion,  Avere  all  baptized  naked, 
whether  they  were  men,  women  or  children.  Vossius 
(De  Baptism,  Disp.  i.  cap.  6,  7,  8)  has  collected  several 
proofs  of  this ;  which  I  shall  omit,  because  it  is  a  clear 
case."     Hist.  Bapt.  vol.  ii.  p.  311. 

'Robinson  relates  several  of  these  facts  which  transpired  in  the 
baptism  of  those  days,  but  they  are  too  disgusting  to  find  a  place  in 
our  pages. 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  163 

We  must  here  repeat  that  we  do  not  advert  to  this  in- 
decorous fact  in  order  to  cast  odium  on  the  practice  of 
submersion,  but  because  we  intend  hereafter  to  make  a 
very  grave  and  important  use  of  it ;  since  it  will  appear 
that  we  have  as  good  evidence  for  baptizing  in  a  state  of 
nudity  as  we  have  for  submersion. 


CHAPTER  II. 

In  treating  the  subject  before  us,  we  shall  carefully 
examine  the  following  propositions : — 

I.  Does  the  NeAv  Testament  afford  any  proof  that  bap- 
tism Avas  administered  among  the  early  Christians  by 
submersion?' 

II.  Is  the  mode  of  baptism  of  such  essential  import- 
ance, that  the  example  would  be  binding  on  us ;  could  it 
be  conclusively  shown  that  either  mode  constituted  the 
primitive  practice  ? 

III.  Is  the  mode  by  affusion  decidedly  more  Scriptural, 
appropriate  and  edifying  than  that  by  immersion  ?* 

1.  Does  the  New  Testament  afford  any  proof  that  bap- 
tism was  administered  among  the  early  Christians  by 
submersion  ? 

If  such  proof  is  contained  in  the  writings  of  the  New 
Testament,  it  must  be  found  either  in  the  literal  terms 
used  in  reference  to  baptism ;  or  in  the  circumstances 
attending  its  administration ;  or  in  the  metaphorical  lan- 
guage applied  to  it. 

'By  suhmersion,  we  understand  total  plunging  under  the  water ; 

immersion,  dipping  and  plunging  may  be  jmrtial  or  e7itire,  according 
to  the  circumstances  under  which  the  several  terms  are  used. 

^We  shall  employ  the  words:  sprinkling,  aspersion,  pouring,  affi^- 
sio7i  and  perfusion,  interchangeably,  not  indeed  as  meaning  precisely 
the  same  thing,  for  this  is  not  the  fact,  but  as  designating  the  same 
general  mode  of  baptism  in  contradistinction  to  submersion. 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  165 

THE    LITERAL    TERMS    USED    IN    THE     NEW   TESTAMENT    IN 
REFERENCE    TO    BAPTISM. 

1 .  It  cannot  be  found  in  the  literal  terms  used  in  re- 
ference to  baptism.  Where  is  the  express  command  of 
Christ  or  his  apostles  to  baptize  by  submersion? — we 
challenge  our  opponents  to  point  it  out.  Where  is  the 
inspired  declaration,  that  those  who  received  baptism  at 
the  hands  of  the  first  teachers  of  Christianity,  were 
plunged  entirely  under  the  water? — it  has  never  yet  been 
discovered.  The  injunction  to  baptize  all,  is  plain  and 
positive,  but  respecting  the  mode  of  applying  the  water, 
nothing  is  specified. 

The  only  terms  employed  in  reference  to  baptism,  from 
the  import  of  which  our  opponents  pretend  to  be  able  to 
prove  submersion,  are  the  verb,  fiaLTrn^a)  and  its  cognates, 
and  the  prepositions  s^,  m,  oltto  and  ex  or  i^ — Now,  to  con- 
vince our  readers  that  none  of  these  terms  afford  one 
particle  of  evidence  in  support  of  submersion,  and  that 
if  they  reflect  any  light  at  all  on  the  question,  it  is  in 
favor  of  affusion,  we  shall  enter  into  a  fair  and  impartial 
investigation  of  their  signification,  and  state  nothing  but 
what  we  either  know  or  have  good  reason  to  believe  to 
be  the  honest  and  unvarnished  truth. 

The  Greek  term,  /S^.TT/^a)  (baptizo)  is  derived  from 
^ATTTo,  (bapto,)  and  when  used  to  designate  Christian  bap- 
tism, implies  the  application  of  Avater  to  the  subject  of 
the  ordinance,  but  not  the  mode  of  its  application. — More 
of  this  hereafter. 

BAPTO. 

Even  ^TTTo,^  (bapto,)  the  root,  Aviiich   is  a   stronger 

'This  word  is  never  used  in  reference  to  Christian  baptism ;  it  oc- 
curs but  four  times  in  the  New  Testament,  viz.  Matt.  xxvi.  23,  Luke 
xvi.  24,  John  xiii.  26,  and  Rev.  xix.  13,  and  is  in  every  instance 


166  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

term  than  its  derivative  ji:L^Tt(^a>  (baptizo),  does  not  uni- 
formly nor  necessarily  imply  submersion.  We  indeed 
admit  that  this  may  be  its  most  common  sense,  nay 
that  it  is  its  primitive  sense ;  but  it  is  undoubtedly  true 
that  tlie  same  word  has  passed  over  to  other  mean- 
ings, such  as  to  sprinkle  or  stam,  to  clip  partially  into 
a  fluid,  to  ivet  slightly,  to  dye,  &lq..,  without  any  re- 
ference to  mode.  This  application  of  the  term  was  once 
strenuously  resisted  by  our  Baptist  brethren,  but  the  more 
learned  among  them  now  entirely  abandon  this  ground. 
Indeed,  so  far  has  the  word  passed  from  its  original  sense, 
that  it  is  even  applied  to  coloring  an  object  superficially 
by  gold,  that  is,  to  gilding.  A  few  examples  on  so  plain 
a  subject,  must  suffice.  One  of  these  examples  is  found 
in  Rev.  xix.  13,  "And  he  was  clothed  with  a  vesture 
dipped  in  blood;  lii^a.f^/ji.inv  a.tfA.a.rt,  that  is,  baptized  or 
stained  in  blood,  and  that  not  by  being  plunged  in  it,  but 
aspersed  or  sprinkled  with  it.  That  this  is  a  correct  par- 
aphrase is  manifest  from  the  nature  of  the  case.  The 
allusion  is  to  a  conqueror  having  his  garments  stained  in 
battle  by  the  blood  of  his  enemies.  Now,  it  is  well 
known  that  when  a  chieftain's  garment  is  thus  stained, 
it  is  not  effected  by  plunging  or  submersing  it  in  blood, 
but  by  sprinkling  or  aspersing.  Or  the  figure  may  refer 
to  a  vintager ;  and  how  is  his  garment  baptized  or  stained 

translated  by  the  Englisli  word,  dtp,  which  does  not  absolutely  im- 
ply total  plunging,  and  has  not  this  signification  in  either  of  those 
passages.  It  means  to  incline  downward  as  the  magnetic  needle ;  to 
examine  in  a  slight  and  hasty  manner,  as  dipping  in  the  sciences ;  to 
engage  slightly  in  any  business,  as  dipping  in  the  funds,  &c.;  to  enter 
the  water  with  the  extreme  point  of  something,  as  dipping  the  end 
of  the  finger  in  it.  See  Webster  and  Walker.  The  idea  of  entire 
2)lunging  has  been  attached  to  it  by  the  fact,  that  the  Baptists  have 
adopted  it  to  designate  their  mode  of  baptism. 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  167 

by  the  juice  of  the  grape  when  engaged  in  treading  the 
wine-press  ? — unquestionably  by  the  occasional  sprink- 
ling or  effusion  of  the  juice ;  he  does  not  plunge  himself 
into  the  wine-vat,  but  the  liquor  sometimes  gushes  out 
upon  him.  Thus  the  apparel  of  our  Saviour  was  not 
plunged,  nor  even  wholly  dyed  in  blood,  when  wrestling 
with  the  powers  of  darkness  in  Gethsemane,  but  his 
blood  may  be  supposed  to  have  oozed  out,  and  to  have 
stained  it  in  places.  To  be  convinced  of  the  correctness 
of  this  criticism,  we  request  the  reader  to  compare  Rev. 
xix.  11 — 15,  with  a  parallel  passage,  Isa.  Ixiii.  1 — 3, 
"  Who  is  this  that  cometh  from  Edom,  with  dyed  gar- 
ments from  Bozra.  Wherefore  art  thou  red  in  thine  ap- 
parel and  thy  garments  like  him  that  treadeth  the  zvine- 
press.  I  have  ti'odden  the  wine-press  alone  ;  and  of  the 
people  there  was  none  with  me  ;  for  I  will  tread  them  in 
anger  and  trample  them  in  my  fury  and  their  blood  shall 
be  SPRINKLED  vpon  my  garments,  and  I  will  stain  all 
my  raiment.'''' 

Here  then  we  undoubtedly  have  one  case  in  which  the 
word  in  question,  does  not  imply  submersion.  ^ 

Another  may  be  found  in  Matt.  xxvi.  23  :  "  He  that 
dippeth  his  hand  with  me  in  the  dish,"  that  is,  he  that 
baptizeth  his  hand,  o  i/xUdi^^^  *  *  txv  x.H^-  Now  no  one 
acquainted  Avith  the  mode  of  eating  in  the  east,  will  pre- 
tend that  Judas  plunged  his  whole  hand  in  the  liquid 
food  contained  in  the  dish;  "nothing  more  can  be 
meant,"  says  a  distinguished  writer,  "  than  that  he  took 
tlie  bitter  herbs  which  were  eaten  at  the  passover,  or 
other  articles  of  food,  and  with  his  fingers  dipped  them 
in  the  sauce  prepared."  It  is  a  point  of  etiquette  among 
the  Turks  and  others  in  Oriental  countries,  when  eating, 
to  present   any  delicate  morsel,  in  the  fingers,  to  the 


168  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

mouth  of  a  giiest.^  This  accords  precisely  with-  John 
xiii.  26  :  "  He  it  is  to  whom  I  shall  give  a  sop  (morsel, 
■^o/uicv,'^  *  *  and  when  he  had  dipped  the  morsel,  he 
gave  it  to  Judas,"  &c.  To  dip  the  hand  in  the  platter, 
then,  was  not  to  bury  it  up  to  the  wrist  in  the  sauce,  but 
simply  to  take  food  from  it  with  the  fingers  in  Asiatic 
style,  instead  of  using  a  spoon  or  fork  after  the  manner 
of  our  own  country. 

The  last  instance  that  we  shall  quote  from  the  Scrip- 
tures to  prove  that  S^ttto  does  not  necessarily  import  sub- 
mersion, is  contained  Dan.  iv.  33,  (see  also  chap.  v.  21) : 
"  His  body  (Nebuchadnezzar's)  was  wet  with  the  dew 
of  heaven."  Here  we  have  a  baptism  by  the  descent  of 
dew  on  him  Avho  was  the  subject  of  it,  and  the  English 
word  ivet,  fully  expresses  the  idea  intended  to  be  con- 
veyed. Now,  though  we  have  read  of  "  dew-besprin- 
kled grass,"  we  never  have  of  Aew-submer ged  grass. 
To  urge  that  the  dews  in  Babylon  are  copious,  and  that 
Nebuchadnezzar  was  therefore  thoroughly  drenched,  by 
no  means  removes  the  difficulty  ;  for  still  it  was  no  total 
plunging.  Moreover,  no  respectable  critic  will  hazard 
his  reputation  by  assuming  this  position ;  the  dews  in 
that  country  are  not  now  sufficiently  remarkable  to  at- 
tract the  attention  of  travellers.^     Our  Baptist  brethren, 

'Tims  Dr.  Jowett,  speaking  of  their  manners,  says,  "But  the 
practice  whicii  was  most  revolting  to  me  was  this;  when  the  master 
of  the  house  found  in  the  dish  any  dainty  morsel,  he  took  it  out  with 
his  fingers  and  applied  it  to  my  mouth.  This  was  true  Syrian  cour- 
tesy and  hospitality;  and  had  I  been  sufficiently  well-bred,  my 
mouth  would  have  opened  to  receive  it." — Christian  Researches  in 
Syria,  &c. — See  Robinson's  Calmet,  art.  Eating. 

-Mr.  Rich,  in  his  "  Memoir  on  the  Ruins  of  Babylon,"  though 
he  speaks  of  gardens  and  cultivation,  says  nothing  of  dews.  Lon- 
don, 1815. 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  169 

in  their  efforts  to  show,  that  to  be  moistened  with  the 
falling  dew,  is  tantamount  to  submersion,  are  unwittingly- 
establishing  the  validity  of  baptism  by  sprinkling,  for  it 
is  virtually  proving  that  sprinkling  is  equivalent  to  their 
ideas  of  submersion. 

We  have  now  adduced  three  distinct  examples,  taken 
from  the  Sacred  Writings,  in  neither  of  which  the  word 
implies  total  plunging,  or  even  any  thing  like  it. 
We  might  also  with  equal  propriety  have  referred  to  the 
case  of  the  rich  man  (Luke  xvi.  24,)  who  prayed  Abra- 
ham to  send  Lazarus  that  he  might  dip  {fia-TrTt)  the  tip  of 
his  finger,  &c.  But  the  foregoing  are  sufficient  for  our 
purpose.' 

Let  us  next  inquire  into  the  meaning  of  the  word 
as  used  by  profane  authors.  "  In  the  battle  of  the  frogs 
and  mice,  a  mouse  is  represented  as  dyeing  or  color- 
ing the  lake  with  his  blood — i<^a.7r]{lo  aufxAli  a/^v«.  On  this 
there  was  once  a  battle  royal  to  prove  that  it  could  be 
proper  to  speak  of  dipping  a  lake  into  the  blood  of  a 
mouse;  and  all  the  powers  of  rhetoric  were  put  in  re- 
quisition to  justify  the  usage.  Hear  now  Mr.  Carson, 
inferior  in  learning  and  research  to  none  of  the  Baptists : 
"To  suppose  that  there  is  here  any  extravagant  allusion 
to  the  literal  immersion  or  dipping  of  a  lake,  is  a  mon- 
strous perversion  of  taste.     The  lake  is  said  to  be  dyed, 

'The  learned  Taylor  in  commenting  on  these  several  cases,  uses 
the  following  energetic  language  :  "  Now,  will  any  man  persuade 
me,  that  language  tolerates  the  expression  '  to  plunge  tlie  tip  of  a 
finger  V — that  Christianity  tolerates  the  notion  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
'  wearing  a  garment  plunged  in  blood  ?' — that  common  decency  tole- 
rates the  plunging  of  two  hands  in  the  same  dish,  or,  for  aught  I 
know,  no  less  tlian  thirteen  hands,  at  the  same  moment  1  No,  sir ! 
what  I  would  not  believe  of  Hottentots,  without  ample  evidence,  I 
will  not  believe  of  Christ." 
15 


170  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

not  to  be  dipped,  or  poured,  or  sprinkled.  There  is  in 
the  word  no  reference  to  mode.  Had  Baptists  entrenched 
themselves  here,  they  would  have  saved  themselves  much 
useless  toil,  and  much  false  criticism,  without  straining 
to  the  impeachment  of  their  candor  or  their  taste.  What 
a  monstrous  paradox  in  rhetoric  is  the  figuring  of  the 
dipping  of  a  lake  in  the  blood  of  a  mouse!  Yet  Dr. 
Gale  supposes  that  the  lake  was  dipped  by  hyperbole. 
The  literal  sense  he  says  is,  the  lake  was  dipped  in 
blood.  Never  was  there  such  a  figure.  The  lake  is  not 
said  to  be  dipped  in  blood,  but  to  be  dyed  with  blood.' 
p.  67,  Am.  edition,  N.  York,  1832.  This  is  well  said, 
and  is  the  more  to  our  purpose  on  account  of  its  author. 
Indeed  his  whole  discussion  of  this  point  is  able,  lucid, 
and  decisive.  Of  the  examples  adduced  by  him  we  shall 
quote  one  or  two  more. 

'"Hippocrates  employs  it  to  denote  dying,  by  drop- 
ping the  dying  liquid  on  the  thing  dyed :  iTntScty  i7no-la.^n 
iTTt  TO,  ifj.dLTist  lia.TWaii :  '  When  it  di'ops  upon  the  garments 
they  are  dyed.''  This  surely  is  not  dying  by  dipping.' " 
Carson,  p.  60. 

"'Again.  In  Arrian — Expedition  of  Alexander:  tovi 
ii  Trofyma.^  xiyit  'i<iiaepc'^c  oTi  ioLTrTrnTOii  ivcTo;:  '  Nearclius  relates 
that  the  Indians  dye  their  beards.'  It  will  not  be  con- 
tended that  they  dyed  their  beards  by  immersion.' p.  61. 

"  He  quotes  cases  in  which  it  is  used  to  describe  the 
coloring  of  the  hair ;  the  staining  of  a  garment  by  blood ; 
the  staining  of  the  hand  by  crushing  a  coloring  substance 
in  it ;  for  which,  and  others  of  a  like  kind,  we  refer  to 
him,  and  to  Prof.  Stuart. 

"  In  the  compounds  and  derivations  of  this  word  the 
sense  to  dye  is  very  extensive ;  to  be  fully  satisfied  of 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  171 

which,  let  any  one  examine  tlie  Thesaurus  of  H.  Ste- 
phens, or  the  abbreviation  of  it  by  Scapula  on  this  word. 

"It  is  compounded  with  colors  of  all  kinds,  as  7ro^<pu^i>- 
jfi*<5»)c  usL;j^ivQivo/iu.<j»tg,  of  a  purple,  or  hyacinthine  dye.  It 
denotes  a  dyer,  a  dying  vat,  a  dye-house,  etc.,  0^<pi'j;  jix- 
^uov,  etc.,  and  it  even  passes,  as  before  stated,  to  cases  in 
which  a  new  color  is  produced  by  the  external  application 
of  a  solid,  as  ;t§!^<^'^*<P«f)  colored  with  gold,  or  gilded. 

"  But  it  is  needless  to  quote  at  large  all  the  examples 
which  might  be  adduced  to  illustrate  and  confirm  these 
points  ;  and  as  all  that  we  claim  is  conceded  even  by  our 
Baptist  brethren,  to  proceed  farther  would  seem  like  an 
attempt  at  useless  display."' 

In  accordance  with  the  foregoing  criticisms,  is  the  tes- 
timony of  Mr.  Edwards  and  Dr.  John  Dick.  "  I  would 
say  thus  much,"  remarks  the  former,  "  of  the  term  0x7rloy 
tlaat  it  is  a  term  of  such  latitude,  that  he  who  shall  attempt 
to  prove,  from  its  use  in  various  authors,  an  absolute  and 
total  immersion,  will  find  he  has  undertaken  that  which 
he  cannot  finally  perform  ;"  and  the  latter  adds,  "  1  do 
not  intend  to  deny  that  0:t7rrce  ever  means  to  dip,  but  that 
this  is  its  only  sense ;  and  hence  we  may  fairly  conclude, 
that  although  its  derivative  JSattIi^oj  means  to  immerse,  it 
does  not  follow  that  this  is  its  only  signification." 

We  close  this  critique  by  remarking,  that  the  Rev. 
John  Graves,  who  was  undoubtedly  an  honest  and  inde- 
pendent Greek  lexicographer,  with  Parkhurst  and  other 
distinguished  men,  says  :  "Ba^ra  (bapto)  signifies  to  dip, 
plunge,  immerse;  to  ivash;  to  ivet,  moisten,  sprinkle ^ 
to  steep,  imbue,  to  dye,  stain,  color.'''' 

'See  Bib.  Rep.  for  Jan.  1840,  p.  50,  &c. 


CHAPTER  III. 

BAPTIZO. 

The  next  object  of  inquiry  is,  the  true  import  of  ^u-rcn^u 
(baptizo),  one  of  the  derivatives  oi  ^t-n-Tu;  and  here  let  it 
be  observed  that  by  the  laws  of  etymology,  derivative 
words  lose  some  of  the  force  of  their  primitives.  Thus 
TTxa-xo!  (pascho)  to  suffer;  but  ^raSca-  (^pathos),  its  derivative, 
signifies  passion,  evil  affection;  otttts;  (pipto)  to  fall;  but 
its  derivative,  7rTa.ice  (ptaio)  means  to  stumble,  or  partly 
fall.  Hence  we  may  reasonably  presume  that  if  Ba^T» 
primarily  signifies  submerge,  plunge,  bedew,  stain,  wet, 
•fee,  its  derivative,  /i^tTni^o!,  may  indicate  something  less 
than  submersing,  plunging,  &c.,  just  as  in  English,  the 
word  blackish,  (a  derivative  of  black)  signifies  not  quite 
black,  and  reddish  (a  derivative  of  red)  signifies  not  alto- 
gether red,  &c. 

It  is  well  known  that  our  Baptist  friends  have  confi- 
dently maintained,  that  the  only  legitimate  and  authorized 
meaning  of  this  word,  is  to  submerse ;  but  the  fact  just 
adverted  to,  in  reference  to  its  root,  affords  presumptive 
evidence  to  the  contrary;  and  if  the  testimony  of  the 
most  profound  and  competent  Greek  scholars  that  ever 
lived,  may  be  depended  upon,  there  are  many  examples 
in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  in  which  it  can  mean  nothing 
more  than  affusion,  aspersion  or  partial  washing. 

If  we  should  even  concede  that  the  original  or  etymo- 
logical import  of  Bolttti^o)  was  to  submerse,  yet  would  this 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  173 

by  no  means  settle  its  sense  in  relation  to  Christian  bap- 
tism. For  we  all  knoAV  that  words  are  used  in  more 
meanings  than  one,  and  that  they  frequently  depart  from 
their  primiti(?e  ideas  and  pass  over  to  meanings  quite  di- 
verse. That  a  term  originally  signifying  to  submerse 
should  assume  the  idea  of  sprinkling,  is  so  natural  and 
probable,  that  the  slightest  attention  to  the  laws  of  the 
mind  and  to  well  known  facts  will  leave  no  room  to  doubt. 
"No  principal,"  remarks  President  Beecher,  "  is  more 
universally  admitted  by  all  sound  philologists,  than  that 
to  establish  the  original  and  primitive  meaning  of  a  word, 
is  not  at  all  decisive  as  it  regards  its  subsequent  usages. 
It  often  aids  only  as  giving  a  clue  by  which  we  can  trace 
the  progress  of  the  imagination,  or  the  association  of 
ideas  in  leading  the  mind  from  meaning  to  meaning,  on 
some  ground  of  relative  similitude,  or  connection  of  cause 
and  effect. 

So  the  verb  to  spring,  denotes  an  act,  and  gives  rise 
to  a  noun  denoting  an  act.  A  perception  of  similitude 
transfers  the  word  to  the  issuing  of  water  from  a  fountain 
— to  the  motion  of  a  watch-spring — and  to  the  springing 
of  plants  in  the  spring  of  the  year.  Yet  who  does  not 
feel  that  to  be  able  to  trace  such  a  process  of  thought,  is 
far  from  proving  that,  when  a  man  in  one  case  says,  I 
made  a  spring  over  the  ditch,  in  another,  I  broke  the 
spring  of  my  watch,  in  another,  I  drank  from  the  spring, 
in  another,  I  prefer  spring  to  winter,  he  means  in  each 
case  the  same  thing  by  the  word  spring?  And  who  in 
using  these  words,  always  resorts  to  the  original  idea  of 
the  verb  ?  Indeed,  so  far  is  it  from  being  true  that  this 
is  commonly  done,  that  most  persons  are  pleased  when 
the  track  of  the  mind  is  uncovered,  and  the  path  is 
pointed  out  by  which  it  passed  from  meaning  to  meaning, 
15* 


174  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

as  if  a  new  idea  had  been  acquired — so  conversation, 
j)revent,  charity,  as  now  used,  have  obviously  departed 
widely  from  the  sense  in  which  they  were  used  in  the 
days  of  the  translators  of  the  Bible. 

"  But  to  multiply  words  on  a  point  so  plain,  would  be 
needless,  had  not  so  much  stress  been  laid  on  the  sup- 
posed original  meaning  of  this  word.  It  is  therefore  too 
plain  to  be  denied,  that  words  do  often  so  far  depart  from 
their  primitive  meaning,  as  entirely  to  leave  out  the  orig- 
inal idea — and  that  the  secondary  senses  of  a  word  are 
often  by  far  the  most  numerous  and  important. 

The  Editor  of  Calmet  quotes  some  eighty  examples, 
taken  in  part  from  the  ancient  fathers  and  classic  writers, 
hut  chiefly  from  the  Bible,  in  every  one  of  which,  the 
word  in  question  implies  less  than  submersion,  and  in 
most  of  them,  no  more  than  aflfusion,  moistening,  pour- 
ing or  staining.  We  can  do  no  more  than  examine  a 
few  of  them. 

The  first  that  we  shall  take  up  is  recorded  Mark  vii.  4- 
"  And  many  other  things  there  be  which  they  have  re- 
ceived to  hold,  as  the  washing  {li:f^Tta-fx'.v; — the  hap- 
tisms)  of  cups  and  pots,  brazen  vessels  and  of  tables." 
The  word  translated  tables  is  ka/i-^v  (klinon),  which  means 
beds  or  couches ;  thus  the  word  is  rendered  in  the  30th 
verse  of  the  same  chapter  and  in  the  other  eight  passages 
in  which  it  occurs.  "Now,"  says  Mr.  Woods,  "the 
baptism  or  ceremonial  purification  of  cups,  and  pots,  and 
brazen  vessels,  and  couches,  was  doubtless  performed  in 
different  ways.  Cups  and  pots  and  brazen  vessels  might 
possibly  be  immersed  all  over  in  water ;  though  this  is 
not  probable.  But  to  suppose  that  beds  or  couches  were 
immersed  in  the  same  way,  would  be  unreasonable,  espe- 
cially since  one  of  the  prescribed  modes  of  ceremonial 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  175 

purification,  and  indeed  the  most  common  mode,  was  the 
sprinkling  of  consecrated  ivater."  We  do  not  deny  the 
abstract  possibility  of  plunging  beds  under  water,  but 
would  it  have  been  practicable  to  do  so  as  often  as  the 
superstitious  fastidiousness  of  the  Pharisees  required  a 
lustration,  without  at  the  same  time  rendering  them  con- 
stantly unfit  for  use?  The  orientals  have  no  chairs,  they 
sit  or  recline  on  divans  or  a  kind  of  sofas,  which  also 
serve  the  purpose  of  bedsteads.  Whenever  an  unclean 
person  sat  upon  these  divans,  they  were  thereby  rendered 
ceremoniously  unclean,  and  every  one  that  touched  them 
previously  to  their  purification,  was  in  like  manner  de- 
filed. The  Pharisees  carried  their  notions  on  this  point 
to  an  extravagant  length  and  precision,  and  frequently 
baptized  their  beds  and  other  furniture,  although  they 
knew  of  no  actual  defilement,  in  order  to  guard  against 
any  possible  impurity.  But  that  they  on  all  such  occa- 
sions plunged  their  beds  under  the  water,  is  not  only  in- 
credible, but  absolutely  impossible.  The  testimony  of 
Dr.  Fisk  and  Dr.  A.  Clarke  on  this  subject  is  just  in 
point.  "  There  is  no  reason  to  think,"  says  the  former' 
" that  this  baptism  consisted  in  immersion.  'Cups  and 
pots,  and  brazen  vessels,'  may  have  been  baptized  by 
being  plunged  into  water;  but,  as  the  operation  could 
have  been  performed  equally  well,  by  pouring  water  into 
them  and  upon  them,  we  can  draw  no  certain  conclusion 
respecting  the  mode,  and  the  words  /2*^t/^5,7  and  i^^Tnia-- 
(Mw;  convey  nothing  more  than  the  general  idea  of  ivash- 
ing.  The  last  word  in  the  passage,  x.Ktvm,  is  improperly 
rendered  tables,  in  our  version,  and  the  proper  translation 
is  beds  or  couches. — These  were  the  couches  on  which 
they  reclined  at  their  meals.  They  were  so  large,  as  to 
'Theology,  Vol.  ii.  375. 


176  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

hold  several  persons  at  the  same  time ;  and,  from  their 
size,  it  seems  reasonable  to  suppose  that  they  were  "Jojo- 
tizecV  not  by  being  immersed  in  water,  but  by  being 
washed  ivith  the  hand,  or  sprinkled,  to  remove  any  real 
or  fancied  impurity." 

"As  the  word  fidL7r]t<r/A.av;,  baptisms,''''  adds  Dr.  Clark' 
"  is  applied  to  all  these;  and  as  it  is  contended,  that  this 
word,  and  the  verb  whence  it  is  derived,  signify  dipping 
or  immersion  alone,  its  use  in  the  above  cases  refutes  that 
opinion ;  and  shows  that  it  was  used,  not  only  to  express 
dipping  or  immersion,  but  also  sprinkling  and  wash' 
ingr 

The  second  passage  illustrating  the  meaning  of  'RauTrli^o, 
to  which  we  ask  attention,  is  found  John  iii.  25 — 26 
"  then  there  arose  a  question  between  some  of  John's 
disciples  and  the  Jews  about  purifying.  And  they  came 
to  John  and  said  unto  him  Rabbi,  he  that  was  with  thee 
beyond  Jordan,  to  whom  thou  barest  witness,  the  same 
baptizeth  and  all  men  come  to  him." 

The  subject  of  dispute  was  a  Jewish  ordinance,  called 
purification ;  in  order  to  setde  the  question  the  parties 
appealed  to  John  on  the  subject  of  baptism.  This  proves 
that  a  controversy  respecting  one,  equally  involved  the 
other,  or  else  their  appeal  was  totally  irrelevant.  By 
the  way  we  would  remark,  that  this  passage  determines 
John's  baptism  to  have  been  or  to  have  partaken  of  the 
nature  of  Jewish  purification.  But  if  baptism  and  puri- 
fication are  hindred  terms,  it  follows  that  baptism  some- 
times denotes  sprinkling,  because  the  ordinance  of  puri- 
fication was  in  most  instances  performed  by  sprinkling. 

But  Paul  is  still  more  explicit  on  this  point.  He  says 
concerning  the   Levitical  institutions,  that  they  "stood 

•Comment  on  Mark  vii.  4. 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  177 

only  in  meats  and  drinks,  and  divers  tvashings,  JiA<popotc, 
^ATrlcTfxoi;,  different  ba])tis7ns,"  &c.  Tliese  different  bap- 
tisms were  different  modes  of  ablution,  such  as  sprink- 
ling, pouring,  bathing,  &c.  and  among  the  rest,  sprink- 
ling was  the  most  frequent  and  prominent.  As  they  were 
all  legal  purifications,  the  law  of  Moses  must  decide  the 
mode  of  performing  them.  We  find  full  explanations  in 
the  Pentateuch,  Levit.  xiv.  7.  '*  And  he  shall  sprinkle 
upon  him  that  is  to  be  cleansed  from  the  leprosy  seven 
times,  and  shall  pronounce  him  clean,  and  shall  let  the 
living  bird  loose  into  the  open  field."  Numbers  8.  7. 
"  And  thus  shalt  thou  do  unto  them,  to  cleanse  them : 
sprinkle  water  of  purifying  upon  them,  and  let  them 
shave  all  their  flesh,  and  let  them  wash  their  clothes,  and 
so  make  themselves  clean."  See  also  chap.  xix.  18,  &c. 
"  In  allusion  to  this  established  and  well  understood  mode 
of  baptizing  or  sprinkling,  in  order  to  cleanse  or  purify, 
we  find  Isaiah  speaking,  in  his  remarkable  description  of 
the  atonement  of  Christ.  Isaiah  lii.  15,  'So,  shall  he 
sprinkle  many  nations.'  Hence,  too,  when  Ezekiel  de- 
scribes the  future  purification  of  the  people  of  God,  he 
says,  Ezek,  xxxvi.  25,  '  Then  will  I  sprinkle  clean  water 
upon  you,  and  ye  shall  be  clean ;  from  all  your  filthiness 
and  from  all  your  idols  will  I  cleanse  you.'  Sometimes 
oil  was  used  for  sprinkling  (see  Levit.  xiv.  IG,)  some- 
times blood  (see  Levit  v.  9,  Number  19,  1 — 4,)  but  the 
persons  or  objects  to  be  cleansed  or  purified  were  not 
dipped  in  oil  or  blood,  since  it  is  always  expressly  stated, 
that  the  oil  or  blood  or  water  was  sprinkled.  These  facts 
speak  for  themselves — they  scarcely  need  an  application. 
We  do  not  find  even  the  most  remote  allusion  to  the  act 
of  immersion.' 

'Essays   on  the  Mode  of  Christian  Baptism  by  the   Rev.  Prof. 
C.  F.  Schaefter.     See  Luth.  Obs.  Vol.  3,  No.  17. 


178  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

This  same  subject  is  referred  to  by  the  apostle,  Heb* 
vi.  2,  where  he  enumerates  among  the  principles  of  the 
gospel,  "  the  doctrine  of  baptisms,"  l^i-TrTia-fAm^  that  is,  of 
ritual  purifications  under  the  law,  which  were  still  in  part 
adhered  to  among  the  Hebrew  Christians,  and  were  aU 
emblematic  of  that  purity  which  a  holy  God  requires  in 
his  worshippers,  and  which  in  this  figurative  sense 
might  be  classed  among  the  first  principles  of  the  gospel. 
There  is  however,  another  use  which  we  wish  to  make 
of  this  passage  ;  our  opponents  tell  us  that  the  passage, 
"  one  Lord,  one  faith,  one  baptism,"^  imports  that  there 
is  but  one  mode  of  baptism,  but  if  this  argument  be 
good,  then  by  parity  of  reasoning,  the  plural  number, 
baptisms,  imports  a  plurality  of  modes.  Our  branch 
of  the  argument  is  just  as  conclusive  as  the  other.  But 
to  continue  our  illustrations  of  the  meaning  of  the  word 
fieeTTTi^w  in  relation  to  ceremonial  purifications  ;  it  is  said, 
Luke  xi.  38,  "  And  when  the  Pharisee  saw  it,  he  mar- 
velled that  he  (Christ)  had  not  first  washed  efiuTrTia-Bn, 
baptized,  before  dinner."  So  also  Mark  vii.  4  :  "  And 
when  they  come  from  the  market,  except  they  wash, 
0A7rTia-a>na.i,  baptize,  they  eat  not."  Here  Ave  must  again 
remind  the  reader  that  these  washings  or  baptisms  were 
not  performed  for  the  purpose  of  physical  cleanliness ; 
they  were  ceremonial  purifications,  mere  superstitious 
refinings,  upon  the  Mosaic  ordinances  concerning  ablu- 
tion. The  question  then,  to  be  decided,  in  order  to  as- 
certain the  meaning  of  Hct/arTi^o)  in  these  passages,  is : 
what  was  the  mode  of  washing  hands  among  the  Phari- 
sees and  Jews  generally  ?  We  maintain  that  it  was  by 
pouring  water  upon  them.  2  Kings  iii.  2  :  "  Here  is 
Elisha  Ben-Shapat,  who  poured  water  on  the  hands  of 
Elijah.     The   same   practice  prevailed  in  the  days  of 

lEph.  iv.  6. 


MODE    OF   BAPTISM.  179 

Christ,  and  continues  to  this  day  in  the  east,  for  customs 
seldom  or  never  change  in  that  part  of  the  world.  "  The 
table  being  removed,"  says  Pitts,  "before  they  rise  from 
the  ground  on  which  they  sit,  a  slave  or  servant,  who 
stands  attending  on  them  with  a  cup  of  water  to  give 
them  drink,  steps  into  the  middle  with  a  basin,  or  cop- 
per pot  of  water,  something  like  a  coffee-pot,  and  a  little 
soap,  and  lets  the  water  run  upon  their  hands  one  after 
another  as  they  sit.  Such  service,  it  appears,  Elisha 
performed  for  Elijah."  On  this  subject  D'Ohsson  re- 
marks :  "  The  Mussulman  is  generally  seated  on  the 
edge  of  a  sofa  Avith  a  pewter  or  copper  vessel,  lined  with 
tin,  placed  before  him  upon  a  round  piece  of  red  cloth, 
to  prevent  the  carpet  or  mat  from  being  wet :  a  servant 
kneeling  on  the  ground,  pours  out  the  water  for  his 
master,  another  holds  a  cloth  destined  for  the  purifica- 
tions. The  person  who  purifies  himself,  begins  by 
baring  the  arms  as  far  as  the  elbow.  As  he  washes  his 
hands,  mouth,  nostrils,  face,  arms.  Sic,  he  repeats  the 
proper  prayers.  It  is  probable  that  Mohammed  fol- 
lowed, on  this  subject,  the  book  of  Leviticus."  In  the 
Report  of  Mr.  Oscanyan's  Lectures  on  Constantinople, 
contained  in  the  Boston  Recorder,  Jan.  4,  1839,  is  this 
passage  :  "  The  Osmanlis  are  remarkable  for  their  atten- 
tion to  cleanliness.  *  *  *  When  they  wash,  the  water 
is  poured  from  a  vase  upon  the  hands,  over  a  wide  ba- 
sin— they  never  make  use  of  a  basin  or  a  tub  to  wash 
in,  as  is  the  practice  elsew^here.  It  is  a  common  observa- 
tion among  the  Osmanlis,  that  cleanliness  corresponds 
with  the  purity  and  integrity  of  the  mind." 

Dr.  A.  Clarke  says,  on  Mark  vii.  4,  "  Ba'JD-T/trwTiw  may 
mean  either  to  wash  or  dip.  But  instead  of  the  word  in 
the  text,  the  famous  Codex  Vaticans,  eight  others,  and 


180  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

Huthymius,  have  gwT<^■a)^Ta/,  sprinkle.  According  to 
these  authorities,  then,  the  Jews  sprinkled  their  hands 
before  eating.  And  that  this  was  often  practised,  seems 
extremely  probable  from  the  circumstance  that  these 
were  mere  ceremonial  washings  or  purifications." 

If  then  in  these  instances  of  legal  purifications,  bap- 
tizing  implies,  as  it  most  unquestionably  does,  the  pour- 
ing or  sprinkling  of  water  on  the  beds,  furniture,  hands, 
(fee,  common  sense  tells  us  that  it  cannot  at  the  same 
time  mean  submersing  or  total  plunging. 

Another  instance  of  the  use  of  fi^.-m-Ti^m,  in  which  the 
idea  of  entire  immersion  is  precluded,  is  contained  in  the 
account  of  the  marriage  at  Cana.  On  this  passage  as 
well  as  on  the  three  succeding  ones,  Ave  have  adopted 
the  judicious  comments  of  the  Rev.  Prof.  C.  F.  Schaef- 
fer.^  "  The  six  water-pots  of  stone  which  our  Saviour 
found  at  the  marriage  in  Cana,  John  ii.  6,  and  which 
contained  '  two  or  three  firkins  apiece,'  held  water  to  be 
used,  as  the  passage  itself  tells  us,  v.  6,  for  '  the  purify- 
ing of  the  Jews.'  John  calls  a  firkin  in  Greek  /M67g«7«c, 
a  word  used  by  the  Septuagint  to  express  the  Hebrew 
'bath,'  or  'ephah.'  See  2  Chron.  iv.  5,  in  the  Hebrew 
and  Septuagint.  An  ephah  was  equal  to  seven  gallons 
and  a  half.  See  Home's  Introd.  vol.  iii.  p.  555.  Sup- 
pose that  on  an  average,  each  pot  contained  two  firkins 
and  a  half — the  capacity  of  each  would  be  equal  to  eigh- 
teen gallons  and  three  quarters.  Another  calculation 
which  we  have  made  (for  there  is  some  uncertainty  in 
reducing  ancient  weights,  measures,  &c.,  to  the  modern 
standard)  would  leave  even  this  quantity  too  large,  and 
•agree  better  with  the  estimate  of  Wilson.  This  writer, 
whose  account  we  find  in  Home's  Introd.  vol.  iii.  p.  326, 

•     'See  Essays,  &c.,  Luth.  Obs.  vol.  iii.  No.  17. 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  181 

says  in  his  Travels  in  Egypt  and  the  Holy  Land,  p.  339, 
that  the  shape  of  the  water-pots  in  those  countries  re- 
sembled '  the  bottles  used  in  our  country  for  containing 
vitriol,  having  great  bodies  and  small  necks,'  and  that 
those  which  he  saw  at  Cana  contained  '  three  firkins,' 
that  is,  about  twelve  gallons  each. 

"  Here  we  have  facts.  We  know  that  the  guests  at  the 
nuptial  celebration,  baptized,  that  is,  washed  their  hands. 
The  water  was  poured  on  their  hands  by  an  attendant, 
an  instance  of  which  we  find  in  2  Kings  iii.  11,  '  Here 
is  Elisha — which  poured  water  on  the  hands  of  Elijah,' 
that  is,  here  is  Elisha,  who  was  formerly  the  attendant 
of  Elijah,  who  aided  the  latter  in  performing  his  legal 
ablutions.  Of  course  the  guests  did  not  attempt  to  dip 
themselves  in  these  bottles  or  pots,  even  if  the  limited 
quantity  of  water  would  have  sufiiced  for  the  bathing  of 
the  large  number  of  guests.  We  may  conclude  that 
they  tvashed,  that  is,  in  Greek,  baptized,  by  having  the 
water  applied  in  the  usual  way. 

"  So  far  we  have  at  least  negative  proof,  that  0A^li^a) 
cannot  always  mean  'dip.'  Indeed  we  see  the  word 
applied  to  the  act  of  sprinkling  or  pouring,  by  the  sacred 
writers  in  such  a  manner  as  to  convince  us  that  they 
deemed  the  word  not  liable  to  be  misunderstood.  Any 
Jew  who  read  their  writings  would  naturally  judge  that 
the  Greek  '/S^^t;,^*'  was  the  Hebrew  'sprinkle.' 

"  Another  instance  will  confirm  this  view.  We  read 
in  1  Cor.  x.  1 — 2,  '  all  our  fathers  were  all  baptized  unto 
Moses  in  the  cloud  and  in  the  sea.'  The  question  is : 
How  were  the  Israelites  baptized  on  the  occasion  to 
which  Paul  refers,  i.  e.  when  the  Egyptians  were  in 
pursuit  of  them  and  had  reached  the  sea  ?  As  it  is  not 
Christian  baptism  of  which  the  apostle  speaks,  he  calls 
the  application  of  water  to  the  Israelites  a  baptism,  evi- 
16 


182  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

dently  from  the  similarity  in  Avhich  water  in  both  cases 
was  applied.  Now  were  they  dipped  in  water — im- 
mersed? But  Moses  expressly  says,  Exod.  xiv.  22, 
The  children  of  Israel  Avent  into  the  midst  of  the  sea 
upon  the  dry  ground.  How  then  could  they  be  im- 
mersed ?  Let  us,  in  imagination,  represent  the  scene  to 
ourselves.  The  Avaters,  flowing  to  the  line,  and  there 
checked  and  rising  upward,  (for  they  were  a  wall  unto 
them  on  their  right  hand,  and  on  their  left  hand,)  dashed 
their  spray  upon  the  Israelites  as  they  walked  onward. 
A  dew  or  rain  from  the  cloud  likewise  descended.  See 
Psalms  Ixxvii.  15 — 20.  This  sprinkling  of  the  water  as 
it  fell  on  them  from  above,  appeared  to  Paul  to  resemble 
so  strongly  the  pouring  or  sprinkling  of  water  in  drops, 
on  the  head  of  the  candidate  for  baptism,  that  in  his 
usual  bold  style,  he  did  not  hesitate  to  call  it  a  baptism. 
There  was,  it  is  true,  on  this  same  occasion,  a  genuine 
case  of  immersion,  but  it  was  the  Egyptian  army  that 
was  so  completely  dipped  under  water,  and  hence  Paul 
is  very  careful  not  to  say  that  they  (the  Egyptians)  were 
baptized.  How  shall  this  passage  be  otherwise  ex- 
plained ?  Shall  we  say  that  the  Israelites,  between  the 
two  walls  of  water,  were  thus  in  a  manner  immersed  ? 
But  then  the  somewhat  mysterious  conclusion  would 
foUoAV,  that  a  person  may  be  dipped  in  water,  (if  ^^'n- 
7/^01  has  such  a  meaning,)  and  yet  not  leave  "  the  dry 
ground.''^  If  so,  then  those  who  dip  in  the  water,  espe- 
cially when  sickly  persons  are  to  submit  to  the  opera- 
tion, should  provide  two  large  brewers'  vessels,  fill  them 
with  water,  and  lead  the  persons  who  are  to  be  dipped, 
on  "  dry  ground"  between  them.  The  folly  of  such  a 
procedure  is  obvious.  We  m-ust  give  some  rational 
meaning  to  the  words  of  the  apostle,  and  we  have  given 
the  only  one  which  the  passage  appears  to  admit/' 


CHAPTER  IV. 

Though  the  argument  contained  in  1  Cor.  x.  1 — 2,  as 
illustrated  in  the  preceding  chapter,  can  scarcely  fail  to 
prove  satisfactory  to  every  unprejudiced  mind,  yet  in 
order  to  fortify  it  still  more  abundantly,  we  must  add  a 
remark  or  two.  In  order  to  evade  the  force  of  this  argu- 
ment, it  has  been  maintained,  that  the  language  of  the 
apostle  is  tigurative,  and  that  the  "cloud"  was  over  the 
heads  of  the  Israelites  while  the  waters  of  the  Red  Sea 
stood  in  walls  on  either  hand, — thus  surrounding  them 
in  a  manner,  beautifully  typical  of  submersion.  With 
such  flights  of  fancy,  our  imagination  is  indeed  regaled, 
but  our  understanding  is  not  enlightened.  Besides,  it 
is  distinctly  stated,  that  the  cloud,  during  the  passage 
through  the  Red  Sea,  stood  not  over  the  heads  of  the 
Israelites,  but  behind  them.  Exod.  xiv.  19 — 20.  The 
fact  is,  it  alternately  went  behind  them  and  before  them  ; 
now  hanging  in  their  rear,  for  the  purpose  of  concealing 
them  from  their  enemies ;  and  then  preceding  them  in 
their  course,  presenting  a  face  of  splendor  to  them,  and 
a  face  of  darkness  to  their  pursuers. 

It  seems  to  have  been  generally  taken  for  granted  that 
the  baptism  "in  the  cloud  and  in  the  sea,"  took  place  at 
the  same  instant  of  time ;  whereas,  it  is  by  no  means 
clear  that  this  was  the  case,  the  grammatical  structure  of 
the  passage  in  Corinthians  fairly  conveys  the  idea  o(  tivo 


184  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

distinct  times  of  baptism, — one  "  in  the  cloud"  and  the 
other  "in  the  sea;"  and  with  this  hypothesis  agree  the 
Old  Testament  accounts.^ 

The  apostle  says  that  "  all  our  fathers  were  uVo  ^nv  vi<pi\»v 
UNDER  the  cloud,  and  were  all  baptized  iv  in  the  cloud," 
or  with  the  cloud.  This  shows  that  the  cloud  with 
Avhich  they  were  baptized,  stood  over  their  heads  at 
the  time,  as  the  psalmist  says,  "He  spread  a  cloud  for 
a  covering."  But  this  description  does  not  apply  to  the 
time  of  their  passing  the  Red  Sea,  but  to  a  subsequent 
period ;  and  the  cloud  was  not  the  same  that  gave  them 
light  by  night.  Both  the  psalmist  and  Deborah  and 
Baruk,  place  the  time  of  the  "ram"  from  the  cloud  sub- 
sequently to  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea,  and  the  latter 
associates  that  phenomenon  with  the  scenes  of  Sinai. 
Judges  v.  5.  How  beautiful  is  the  sentiment  of  the  psalm- 
ist! When  that  immense  multitude  were  moving  over 
a  tract  of  desert,  described  by  the  concurrent  testimony 
of  all  oriental  travellers  who  have^  visited  it,  to  be  most 
"horrible," — exposed  to  the  burning  rays  of  an  Arabian 
sun,  and  pi'ompted  by  a  parching  thirst  and  numerous 
privations,  to  tempt  God  and  doubt  the  divine  legation  of 
Moses;  then  it  was  that  God  "did  send  a  plentiful 
RAIN  whereby  he  confirmed  his  inheritance"  in  their 
allegiance  to  him  and  Moses  their  leader.  This,  we  ap- 
prehend, is  what  the  apostle  calls  being  baptized  in  the 
cloud;  and  it  was  with  strict  philosophical  propriety  of 
language,  that  he  says  they  were  baptized  ^v  in  or  tvith 
the  cloud,  when  that  cloud  was  being  distilled  upon  them 
in  drops  of  rain. 

That  the  Israelites  were  literally  baptized  with  water, 
I  can  see  no  just  ground  to  deny.     That  they  were  5w6» 

'Psalms  Ixviu.  7 — 9  ;   Judges  v.  4. 


MODE    OF   BAPTISM.  185 

mersed  in  the  cloud,  no  sensible  man  ought  to  affirm,. 
As  to  their  baptism  in  the  sea,  we  know  it  was  not  by- 
submersion.  It  seems  most  probable  that,  as  the  climate 
was  oppressively  Avarm,  and  the  people,  being  closely- 
pursued  by  the  Egyptians,  were  greatly  fatigued,  God 
refreshed  them,  (baptized  them,)  by  sprays  of  the  sea 
being  blown  over  them.  We  indeed  know  that  this  must 
have  been  a  necessary  consequence,  as  "  a  strong  wind 
prevailed  all  that  night."  Exod.  xiv.  21.  This  is  the 
more  probable  inasmuch  as  it  was  so  opportune  to  the 
necessities  of  the  people,  and  also  so  analogous  to  their 
baptism  in  the  cloud.  Who  can  help  but  perceive  that 
die  argument  against  the  doctrine,  that  CuttIi^w  always 
signifies  submersion,  drawn  from  the  text  under  consider- 
ation, is  and  must  forever  remain  complete.  We  will  only 
add,  that  the  new  translation  of  the  Campbellite  Testa- 
ment, as  well  as  the  Baptist  construction,  which  reads : 
."  And  were  all  immersed  into  Moses  in  the  cloud  and  in 
tlie  sea,  "  contradicts  the  facts  in  the  history  no  less  than 
it  does  good  sense,  and  is  an  imposition  on  the  intelli- 
gence and  candor  of  the  age. 

A  few  examples  taken  from  other  than  the  inspired 
writings,  to  show  the  meaning  of  0A7rli^a>,  shall  close  this 
tedious  examination.  This  word  is  applied  to  the  pour- 
ing of  a  fluid  copiously  over  any  thing,  so  as  to  thoroughly 
wet  it,  though  not  completely  or  permanently  to  submerge 
it.  Thus,  Origen  referring  to  the  copious  pouring  of 
water  by  Elijah  on  the  wood  and  on  the  sacrifice,  re- 
presents him  as  baptizing  them.  In  this  case  then,  it 
evidently  means  pouring  and  not  submersing.  It  is  also 
applied  to  cases  where  a  fluid  without  any  agent  rolls  over 
or  floods,  and  covers  any  thing,  as  in  Diodorus  Siculus, 
vol.  vii  p.  191,  as  translated  by  Prof.  Stuart:  ^The 
16* 


186  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

river  borne  along  by  a  more  violent  current,  overwhelmed 
many  («/2a7r7/,^s.)  So,  vol.  i.  p.  107,  he  speaks  of  land 
animals  intercepted  by  the  Nile,  as  ^iTrli^o/uba.,  over- 
whelmed, and  perishing.  The  same  mode  of  speaking 
is  also  applied  to  the  sea-shore,  which  is  spoken  of  by 
Aristotle  as  baptized  or  overwhelmed  by  the  tide.  It  is 
also  applied  in  cases  where  some  person  or  thing  sinks 
passively  into  the  flood.  Thus  Josephus,  in  narrating 
his  shipwreck  on  the  Adriatic,  uses  this  word  to  describe 
the  sinking  of  the  ship.  Now,  if  the  word  be  restricted 
to  the  sense  it  has  in  some  of  these  quotations,  then,  to 
baptize  a  person,  means  to  drown  him.  But  enough. 
We  have  already  adduced  more  than  a  dozen  cases,  in 
which  /S^Trli^ce  or  one  or  the  other  of  its  cognates  occurs, 
and  as  we  think,  incontrovertibly  proven  that  it  does  not 
in  a  single  one  of  these  instances,  imply  submersion.  One 
solitary  example  would  have  been  sufficient  for  the  object 
we  had  in  view,  but  in  order  to  guard  against  every  quib- 
ble and  "make  assurance  doubly  sure,"  we  have  fur- 
nished a  variety  of  examples.  Our  case  then  is  fairly 
made  out,  viz.  that  to  baptize  does  not  uniformly  nor 
necessarily  signify  submersion ;  it  simply  implies  the  ap- 
jilication  of  water,  without  specifying  the  mode  of  that 
application.  Sometimes  it  indeed  means  submersion, 
but  frequently  only  sprinkling,  aspersing,  &;c.,  which  is 
all  we  designed  to  prove  and  abundantly  answers  our 
purpose.  Of  course  the  word  itself  affords  no  clue 
whereby  we  can  determine  its  precise  signification.  Nor 
should  the  plain  English  reader  be  surprised  at  this,  for 
there  are  numerous  analagous  words  in  the  English  and 
other  languages.  Take  for  instance  as  the  first  that  oc- 
curs to  us,  ivash,  which  in  its  primary  sense  means  to 
cleanse  by  a  purifying  fluid,  as  water,  but  by  no  means 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  187 

defines  the  mode  of  applying  the  water.  It  may  be  done 
by  pouring,  dropping,  sprinkling,  rubbing,  moistening, 
bathing,  overflowing,  phmging,  or  by  some  other  process ; 
further,  it  may  refer  to  the  body  in  general  or  only  a 
part  of  it;  and  in  every  case  the  act  may  with  strict  pro- 
priety be  termed  a  washing.  But  this  word  also  passes 
over  into  other  meanings,  and  in  its  progress,  drops  its 
original  idea,  and  assumes  a  signification  that  involves 
neither  to  purify  nor  to  use  a  fluid  at  all.  President 
Beecher's  illustrations  drawn  from  this  word,  are  so 
much  to  the  point  that  we  cannot  forbear  adding  them. 

"As  washing  is  often  performed  by  a  superficial  appli- 
cation of  a  fluid,  it  often  assumes  this  sense  and  loses 
entirely  the  idea  of  cleansing,  as  Avhen  we  speak  of  wash- 
ing a  wound  with  brandy,  or  Avith  some  cooling  applica- 
tion to  alleviate  inflammation.  In  this  case  we  aim  not 
at  cleansing  but  at  medicinal  eflject.  So  Ave  speak  of  the 
sea  as  washing  the  shores  or  rocks,  denoting  not  cleans- 
ing, but  the  copious  supei-ficial  application  of  a  fluid. 

"  Again,  as  a  superficial  application  of  a  fluid  or  a 
coloring  mixture  is  often  made  for  the  sake  of  changing 
the  color,  we  have  to  white-wash,  to  red-wash,  to  yellow- 
wash  ;  and  the  substances  or  fluid  mixtures  Avith  which 
this  is  done,  are  called  AVashes. 

"  Next  it  drops  the  idea  of  a  fluid  entirely,  and  assumes 
the  sense  of  a  superficial  application  of  a  solid — as'  to 
Avash  Avith  silver  or  gold. 

"  And  here  a  remarkable  coincidence  in  result,  in 
Avords  of  meaning  originally  unlike,  deserves  notice  as  a 
striking  illustration  of  the  progress  of  the  mind  in  effect- 
ing such  changes. 

In  Greek  I^-^'^Ik  denotes  originally  to  immerse — action 
alone,  Avithout  reference  to  effect.  In  English  wash  de- 
notes to  cleanse  or  purify  alone,  Avithout  reference  to 


188  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

mode.  Yet  by  the  operation  of  the  laws  of  association, 
both  are  used  to  denote  coloring,  and  both  to  denote 
covering  superficially  with  silver  or  gold. 

"  Finally,  when  we  speak  of  the  wash  of  a  cow-yard, 
and  call  those  places  where  deposits  of  earth  or  filth,  or 
vegetable  matter,  are  made,  washes,  who  will  contend 
that  the  idea  of  purity  is  retained?" 

Similar  transitions  of  meaning  could  be  pointed  out  in 
many  other  English  words ;  also  in  Latin  terms,  as  for 
instance  Hugo,  lustro,  lavo,  &c.  Now  with  such  facts 
before  us,  to  increase  the  number  of  which  indefinitely, 
were  perfectly  easy,  who  can  say  that  there  is  the  slight- 
est improbability  in  the  idea  that  the  word  /iaL?rli^a>  should 
pass  from  the  sense  to  submerse,  to  the  sense  to  sprinkle 
or  even  to  purify  irrespective  of  mode  ?  Can  /3aw7»,  tingo 
and  wash,  pass  through  such  varied  transitions  and  can- 
not ^a.Trji^ai  ? 

The  question  before  us  then,  is  evidently  not  a  purely 
philological  one ;  it  has  indeed  been  too  generally  treated 
as  such,  and  this  has  no  doubt  tended  to  involve  it  in  in- 
creased obscurity;  but  if  we  would  do  justice  to  it,  we 
must  extend  our  investigations  far  beyond  a  mere  consult- 
ation of  our  Greek  dictionary  and  grammar;  Ave  must 
examine  the  context,  the  time,  occasion,  the  habits,  man- 
ners, customs  and  general  ideas  of  the  people,  and  even 
their  peculiar  usages,  in  fine,  all  the  circumstances  that 
stand  in  relation  to  the  specific  use  of  the  word  and  to 
the  transaction  which  it  implies. 

It  is  a  remarkable  fact,  that  notwithstanding  the  copi- 
ousness of  the  Greek  language,  whenever  baptism  is 
spoken  of  in  the  New  Testament,  the  same  words  are 
invariably  employed  to  express  it ;  and  these  are  the  verb 
fiajTrlt^a,  and  its  derivative  noun  ^^ttIitij.^.  This  certainly 
does  not  arise  from  any  poverty  in  the  Greek  language. 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  189 

111  English  (we  mean  Saxon  English,)  we  have  at  least 
four  words  to  express  the  application  of  water,  viz. 
jtlunge,  dip,  sprinkle,  pour,  to  which  we  may  add  the 
general  verb  wash.  But  the  Greek  language  is  much 
more  copious.  While  we  have  but  one  verb  to  express 
entire  immersion,  viz.  the  Avord  plunge,  the  Greek  lan- 
guage has  five  or  six.    Such  as  x.st.rAa-va),  KAruTrovn^ie,  KXTa&oLTr- 

Ti^ce,  ifx^ATTTic^o),  iy.&:L7rTu>,  and  perhaps  some  others.  The 
Greeks  had  also  verbs  to  express  dip,  sprinkle  and  pour ; 
and  two  or  three  to  express  wash,  but  they  abounded 
more  in  verbs  to  express  total  immersion  than  perhaps 
any  thing  else.  Yet  amidst  this  profusion  to  express  it 
unequivocally,  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament  reject 
them  all,  when  speaking  of  baptism,  and  confine  them- 
selves to  /2=t3-7/^a',  and  ^■j.TtlwfjLa.y 

When  speaking  of  the  ordinance  of  baptism  they  do 
not  call  it  immersion,  or  sprinkling,  or  pouring  upon,  but 
emphatically  baptism.  It  seems  that  no  other  verb  but 
0x7rlt^ai,  and  its  derivative  noun  would  answer  the  pur- 
pose. This  is  a  fact  Avorthy  of  special  notice,  and  shows 
the  importance  of  ascertaining  the  exact  meaning  of  tliis 
verb,  and  wherein  it  differs  from  other  verbs  expressing 
the  application  of  water.  To  this  we  have  particularly 
directed  our  attention,  and  the  result  is,  that  all  the  Greek 
verbs  which  express  the  use  of  water,  except  0x7rri^a',  and 
its  cognates,  refer  to  the  manner  of  using  it,  without 
specifying  the  purpose  for  which  it  Avas  used.  Consid- 
ering this  verb  as  indicating  the  purpose  for  Avhich  Avater 

'If  they  had  intended  to  teach  us  that  baptism  was  performed  by 
submersion,  and  they  had  chosen  to  use  the  verb  fixvn^a,  at  all,  they 
would  have  prefixed  the  preposition  nxla.  or  s^,  which  would  have 
given  force  to  the  simple  term,  and  thus  have  placed  the  matter  be- 
yond dispute. 


190  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

was  to  be  applied,  we  plainly  perceive  one  reason  why 
it  was  selected  by  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament  as 
the  word,  and  the  only  word,  suitable  to  express  the  ordi- 
nance of  baptism.  And  we  can  also  easily  see  why  the 
translators  of  our  Bible  chose  to  retain,  in  this  instance, 
the  original  Greek  word,  only  making  such  a  slight 
change  in  the  letters  as  would  make  it  conform  to  the 
idiom  of  our  language.  Indeed  they  had  no  other  alter- 
native, unless  they  had  chosen  to  make  their  translation 
ridiculous.  Suppose  they  had  been  Baptists  in  sentiment, 
and  had  determined  to  reject  the  Greek  words  baptize 
and  baptism,  and  translated  the  original  words  into  plain 
Saxon  English,  and  instead  of  the  "baptism  of  repent- 
ance," they  had  given  us  the  plunging  of  repentance, 
and  instead  of  Christ's  emphatic  words,  "  I  have  a  bap- 
tism to  be  baptized  with,"  the  translators  had  given  us,  / 
have  a  plunging  to  be  plunged  ivith,  every  one  must  at 
once  see  the  monstrous  absurdity  of  such  a  translation. 

In  corroboration  of  the  foregoing  views  we  shall  con- 
clude with  an  extract  from  one  of  the  communications  of 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Hibbard,  published  in  the  "Auburn  Ban- 
iter,"  to  whom  we  feel  much  indebted  :  "  The  verb  /^"■'s^ 
li^i  (baptizo)  is  translated,  so  far  as  I  now  remember, 
but  twice  in  the  common  English  Testament,  (vide  Mark 
vii.  4,  Luke  xi.  38,)  where  it  has  been  rendered  by  the 
verb  wash.  This  circumstance  sufficiently  shows  that 
the  learned  translators  regarded  it  as  extremely  equivocal 
in  pointing  out  any  specific  mode  of  baptism,  and  we 
may  add,  their  modesty  in  this  instance  is  not  an  unwor- 
thy pattern  for  some  more  modern  critics.^ 

'Among  all  the  hundreds  of  languages  known  in  the  world,  there 
is,  we  venture  to  say,  not  one  which  has  a  veib  that  perfectly  cor- 
responds in  import  with  the  New  Testament  signification  of  /inTrji^w, 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  191 

The  word  /2i®-7/^a>  (baptizo)  is  evidently  a  generic  and 
not  a  specific  term,  comprehending  under  it  a  variety 
of  particular  modes  of  applying  water  to  the  person. 
Hence,  it  corresponds  in  sense,  in  some  measure,  to  the 
English  verb  wash,  though  not  perfectly.  For  instance, 
in  Heb.  ix.  10,  where  the  noun  lia^lKT-fxo;  (baptismos) 
occurs;  to  render  that  norm  by  immersion,  Avould  be  to 
give  a  totally  false  version — a  version  that  would  inevita- 
bly misguide  the  English  reader,  and  contradict  other 
parts  of  Scripture.  It  would  be  to  say,  that  the  Leviti- 
cal  institutes  '  stood  only  in  meats  and  drinks,  and  dif- 
ferent immersions,  whereas  it  is  notorious  that  the  Jews 
used  sprinkling  and  pouring,  as  well  as  immersion. 
*  *  *  Our  Baptist  brethren  contend  that  to  immerse 
(submerse),  is  the  primary,  and  only  true  and  literal 
sense  of  to  baptize.  Let  us  suppose,  therefore,  (though 
we  by  no  means  admit,)  that  this  is  correct.  What  have 
they  gained  by  this  argument? — an  argument  upon 
which  they  have  leaned  with  unbounded  self-compla- 
cency in  the  hour  of  controversy.  Do  they  expect  to 
convince  the  world,  because  immerse  may  be  the  primi- 
tive sense  of  baptize,  that  therefore,  the  latter  word  will 
always  bear  that  sense  in  composition  ?  To  illustrate 
this  point,  we  will  propound  a  parallel  case.  The  word 
S-it^r.v  {deipnon)  signifies  in  the  New  Testament  a  supper, 
wliich,  with  the  Hebrews,  was  the  principal  meal  of  the 
day.  It  also  signifies  feast,  banquet,  (Luke  xiv.  12,  et 
al.)     Now  it  is  well  known  that  Paul  uses  this  word  to 

or  a  noun  which  fully  expresses  the  meaning  of  ^m.TrlKrf/.a..  The 
proper  course  then  for  those  who  translate  the  New  Testament,  is 
to  take  the  Greek  words  just  mentioned,  and  give  them  merely 
such  a  change  as  will  conform  them  to  the  idom  of  the  language 
into  which  they  are  translated,  and  this  is  the  rule  no  doubt  which 
hag  been  almost  imiversally  adopted. 


19-2  IXTAXT  BAPn5Tt. 

siaiiily  the  mstitution  of  bread  and  wine,  called  the  Lord's 
supper.  ^'sL:^.^:^  licnzr,  1  Cor.  xi.  20.)  Hence,  if  we 
adhere  riaidly  to  the  primitiTe  meaning  of  the  word,  we 
shall  arrive  at  this  conclusion,  viz.  that  the  Lord's  siq>- 
per  h  a  sumptuaus  npast.  a  full  meal,  a  feast,  a  banquet, 
which  is  exactly  contrary  to  the  true  application  of  the 
term  in  that  connecuon.  But  there  is  no  reason,  so  far  as 
the  mere  philology  of  the  question  is  concerned,  why  we 
should  iuTariably  tise  .e*is-7<*  (baptize)  in  its  primitiTe 
sense  of  to  immerse,  and  not  also  as  invariably  use  -^srm? 
(deipnon)  in  its  primitive  sense  of  a  feast,  ire.  And.  if 
we  can  obey  the  command  to  •  eat  the  Lord's  supper '  by 
eating  a  crumb  of  bread  and  taking  a  sip  of  wine,  analogy 
would  teach  us  that  we  might  obey  the  command  to  be 
'  baptized"  by  having  a  small  quantity  of  water  applied  to 
us.  It  wotild  be  easy  to  extend  observations  in  proof  of 
the  utter  fallacy  of  this  mode  of  arguing  from  the  primitive 
sense  of  words  ;  but  we  have  no  time,  nor  is  it  necessary. 
We  shall  close  this  branch  of  the  subject  with  an  extract 
firom  the  Rev.  R,  Watson. — '  The  word  itself,'  says  he, 
•proves  nothing. — The  verb  (z^*^"*)  with  its  derivatives, 
signifies  to  dip  the  hand  into  a  dish :  to  stain  a  vesture 
with  blood:  to  wet  the  body  with  dew :  to  paint  or  smear 
the  face  with  colors :  to  stain  the  hand  by  pressing  a  sub- 
stance ;  to  be  overwhelmed  in  the  waters  as  a  stmken 
ship ;  to  be  drowned  by  falling  into  water ;  to  sink,  in  the 
neuter  sense ;  to  immerse  totally :  to  plunge  up  to  the 
peck ;  to  be  immersed  up  to  the  middle ;  to  be  drunk 
with  wine ;  to  be  dyed,  tinged,  or  imbued ;  to  wash  by 
aSusion  of  water ;  to  potir  water  upon  the  hands,  or  any 
other  part  of  the  body ;  to  sprinkle.  A  word  then  of  such 
application,  affords  as  good  a  proof  of  sprinkling,  or  par- 
tial dipping,  or  washinff  with  water,  as  for  immersion  in 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  193 

It.  The  controTeKv  on  this  accommodating  word  has 
been  carried  on  to  weariness  :  and  if  ever  the  adrocaies 
of  immersion  could  prove,  what  thev  hare  not  been  2hle 
to  do,  that  plunging  is  \he  primary  meaninf  of  the  term, 
they  would  gain  nothing,  smce,  in  Scriptnre,  it  is  notori^ 
ously  used  to  express  other  applications  of  water.'^"' 
-Tbeokgkal  IxEtitntes,  roL  n. 


IT 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE    GREEK   PREPOSITIONS. 

Having  seen  that  there  is  nothing  in  the  word  yS«5TT;^« 
to  support  the  opinion  that  baptism  was  administered  by 
submersion  among  the  early  Christians,  let  us  next  exam- 
ine the  several  prepositions  connected  with  this  word 
when  applied  to  the  ordinance  in  question,  and  see  whether 
they  afford  any  proof. 

The  prepositions,  four  in  number,  viz.  »,  €/?,  avo  and  «», 
or  «|,  are  indeed  used  in  connection  with  water  baptism, 
but  as  they  are  employed  in  different  senses,  and  even 
promiscuously,  and  are  governed  in  their  meaning  by 
their  context,  just  as  similar  particles  are,  in  the  English 
and  other  languages,  it  is  abundantly  manifest,  that  their 
testimony  to  the  cause  of  our  opponents  must  necessarily 
be,  even  under  favorable  circumstances,  exceedingly 
equivocal.  It  is  surprising  that  recourse  was  ever  had  to 
this  kind  of  evidence,  and  is  only  another  proof  of  the 
weakness  of  the  assumptions  we  are  combating.  When 
men  have  clear  and  substantial  arguments  to  sustain  them, 
there  is  no  necessity  to  resort  to  such  as  are  vague  and 
futile.  That  this  is  most  unquestionably  the  character 
of  all  those  derived  from  the  use  of  the  prepositions  in 
question,  will  sufficiently  appear  before  we  have  done 
with  them. 

It  is  well  known  to  the  mere  tyro  in  the   Greek  lan- 
guage, that  prepositions  signifying  motion  from  a  place, 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  195 

as  ^TTo  and  iK,  and  those  signifying  motion  to  a  place,  as  w, 
are  frequently  interchanged  with  those  which  mark  rest 
in  a  place,  as  j^,  and  vice  versa.  This  fact  of  itself  at  once 
shows  the  impossibility  of  setding  the  question  by  an  ap- 
peal to  these  particles.  But  to  proceed  more  systemati- 
cally. 

THE    PREPOSITION    EN. 

1.  The  primary  meaning  of  n  is  in,  and  it  denotes  rest 
in  a  place,  but  in  composition  it  is  correctly  rendered  at. 
Thus,  "the  tower  «/ (^v)  Siloam ;" — "at  {»)    the   right 
hand  of  God:"  see  Luke  xiii.  4,  Rom.  viii.  34.     Now  it 
is  said,  Matt.  iii.  6,  that  the  people  "  were   baptized  of 
him   (John)  in  Jordan,"  «v  ^a>  Jo^J^v^ — ^f   Jordan   would 
have  been  an  equally  correct  translation,  and  indeed,  ac- 
cording to  our  view,  more  correct.     But  let  us  take  the 
favorite  translation  of  our  Baptist  brethren,  and  see  whether 
it  proves  any  thing  in  support  of  submersion.     According 
to  this  it  is  maintained,  John  stood  in  the  river  Jordan 
when  he  baptized ;  but  does  it  follow  that  he  submersed  ?— • 
by  no  means  ;  as  well  might  it  be  contended  thatm  Beth- 
lehem implies  wider  Bethlehem,  or  in  Baltimore  wider 
the  streets  of  Baltimore.     John  may  have  stood  in  the 
water,  or  at  its  edge,  but  in  neither  case  are  we  justifiable 
in  inferring  that  he  immersed.     All  that  the  preposition 
u  settles,  is  liis    position   in    the  vicinity  of  the  water ; 
his  proximity  to  it;  but  with  the  mode  of  baptism,  it  has 
no  more  to  do  than  our  sitting  at  tlie  table  to  write,  decides 
whether  we  write  a  large  and  bold  or  a  small  and  cramped 
hand. 

In  further  support  of  this  fact,  let  us  inquire  how  this 
same  preposition  «v  is  translated  in  parallel  places.  Mark 
(i.  4)  says  John  baptized  "  zn  the  wilderness;"  Luke  (iii. 
3)  says,  "he  came  into  all  the  country  {Tne^t x^-go^)  about 


196  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

Jordan,  preaching  the  baptism  of  repentance,"  (i.  e.  calling 
the  people  to  repentance  and  baptizing  them,)  and  John 
declares  tliat  he  baptized  in  (sv)  Bethabara,  beyond  Jor- 
dan," John  i.  28,  and  also  in  (iv)  Enon  near  to  Salim, 
Johniii.  23.  Now  what  connection  has  this  preposition 
in  all  these  passages  with  the  mode  of  baptism? — evidently 
not  the  remotest.  If  "baptized  in  Jordan"  implies  sub- 
mersed in  Jordan,  what  is  the  meaning  of  "baptizing  be- 
yond Jordan ;" — "  baptizing  in  Bethabara  ;" — "baptizing 
in  the  wilderness  ?"  If  with  these  illustrations  staring 
them  in  the  face,  our  Baptist  brethren  can  still  see  such 
potent  force  in  the  particle  iv  in  deciding  the  mode  in 
which  the  ceremony  was  performed,  we  confess  their 
powers  of  reason  are  vastly  more  acute  than  ours.  But 
if  we  translate  the  preposition  by  the  English  particle  at 
as  it  actually  is  translated  in  other  places,  and  should  be 
in  the  cases  before  us,  then  the  text  would  read :  John 
baptized  at  Jordan,  or  in  the  vicinity  of  Jordan,  at  Beth- 
abara, at  Enon,  &c.,  and  thus  the  true  meaning  would  be 
distinctly  seen. 

2.  But  the  preposition  iv  has  another  sense  when  used 
in  connection  with  baptism ;  it  is  also  properly  expressed 
by  the  word  with,  indicative  of  the  instrumental  cause 
or  means  by  which  a  thing  is  performed.  Matt.  iii.  11, 
Luke  iii.  16,  "I  indeed  baptize  you  si"  loith  water; "  here 
it  is  rendered  not  in,  but  ivith.  It  is  translated  by  the 
same  word  in  other  connections  ;  thus  Matt,  xxiii.  36, — 
Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  *  *  *  t^  with  (not  in)  all  thy 
heart,  and  iv  with  all  thy  soul,  and  «v  with  all,  <fcc.  Luke 
xiv.  34.  "  If  the  salt  have  lost  his  savor  sv  Tivt  ivith  (not 
in)  what  shall  it  be  seasoned  1 "  Matt.  vi.  29,  "  Solomon 
0  with,  i  e  by  means  o/'all  his  glory  was  not  arrayed  like 
one  of  these."     From  these  examples  it  is  obvious  that 


MODE    OF   BAPTISM.  197 

the  preposition  «v,  in  Matt.  iii.  11,  and  parallel  cases, 
designates  the  means  or  instrument  whereby  a  thing  is 
performed ; — to  baptize  with  water  accordingly  implies 
water  as  the  means  with  which  the  ordinance  is  admin- 
istered, but  has  not  the  most  distant  allusion  to  the  quan- 
tity of  water  used,  or  to  the  mode  of  using  it. 

3.  We  come  now  to  the  third  and  last  sense  of  the 
preposition  ^h  when  used  in  connection  with  baptism, 
which  is  conveyed  by  the  word  by,  signifying  the  effi- 
cient cause  or  the  agency  by  which  a  thing  is  effected. 
"But  ye,"  says  Christ,  "shall  be  baptized  ^v,  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,"  Acts  i.  5  and  xi.  16.  As  this  promise 
refers  to  the  communication  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the 
following  Pentecost,  when  he  scd  upon  each  as  a  cloven 
longue  of  fire,  it  is  very  obvious  that  the  particle  sv  affords 
no  evidence  of  plunging,  but  rather  against  it,  inasmuch 
as  the  mode  of  the  Spirit's  descent  certainly  has  more 
affinity  to  affusion  than  to  plunging.  A  similar  render- 
ing of  this  preposition  is  found  Luke  iv.  1,  "  Jesus  *  *  *  * 
was  led  si-  by  the  Spirit  into  the  wilderness." — Matt.  (iv. 
1)  uses  the  particle  ^^oby,  as  synonymous.  Other  illus- 
trations might  be  quoted,  but  these  are  suflicient  to  show 
that  svj  among  other  uses,  is  employed  to  express  the  effi- 
cient cause  of  a  thing,  and  in  such  cases  is  correctly 
translated  by  the  monosyllable,  by.  But  our  Baptist 
brethren  notwithstanding,  give  us  the  following  notable 
version  of  Acts  i.  15.  "For  John  truly  immersed  in 
water  ;  but  ye  shall  be  immersed  in  the  Holy  Ghost,"  &c. 
No  doubt  this  rendering  accords  best  with  their  views  of 
baptism,  but  it  is  certainly  at  variance  with  the  principles 
of  sound  theology ;  because  the  doctrine  of  the  passage 
Acts  i.  5  is  plainly  this :  John  indeed  baptized  sv  with 
water,  as  the  instrument,  but  ye  shall  be  baptized  sv  by 
17* 


198  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

the  Holy  Ghost  as  the  agent  of  that  spiritual  and  more 
important  baptism  to  which  they  were  referred  by  the 
symbolic  washing.  In  one  case,  the  preposition  denotes 
the  instrumental  cause  or  means,  and  in  the  other,  the 
efficient  cavise  or  agency  ;  but  in  neither  is  there  the  most 
distant  hint  at  the  mode  of  baptism.  The  Baptist  version 
represents  the  Holy  Ghost  as  a  passive,  inert  element  in 
which  the  apostles  were  plunged,  just  as  a  man  is  in 
water ;  Avhich  is  in  itself  as  absurd  as  any  thing  we  can 
conceive  of,  and  is  also  utterly  fatal  to  the  true  sense  of 
the  passage.  But  this  rendering  of  our  Baptist  brethren, 
is  as  inconsistent  with  the  plain  facts  of  history,  as  it  is 
at  war  with  sound  theology.  To  be  convinced  of  this, 
it  is  only  necessary  to  call  to  mind  the  mode  of  the  Spirit's 
descent  upon  the  apostles,  from  which  we  learn,  that  they 
were  in  fact  not  imm,erscd  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  but  that 
the  Holy  Ghost  sat  upon  them. — Can  any  argument  be 
more  conclusive  ? 

We  have  now  amply  shown,  that  the  particle  «•,,  when 
employed  in  the  New  Testament,  in  connection  with  bap- 
tism, has  no  bearing  whatever  upon  the  tnode  of  admin- 
istering that  ordinance ;  or  if  it  have,  it  favors  affusion 
more  than  submersion,  as  is  evident  from  the  manner  of 
the  Spirit's  descent  upon  the  apostles. 


CHAPTER   VI. 

THE  PREPOSITIONS  EIS,  EK  OR  EX  AND  APO. 

The  other  prepositions  used  in  connection  with  baptism 
are  :  i'c,  at  or  f^  and  o-tto, — their  primary  significations  are 
into,  out  of,  and  from;  but  it  is  well  known  that  in  com- 
position, they  are  frequently  used  in  senses  different  from 
those  just  stated,  so  that  it  would  unquestionably  lead  to 
error,  to  force  upon  them  uniformly  the  same  meaning 
irrespective  of  their  connection. 

The  most  specious  case  in  favor  of  sumersion, — we 
mean  in  a  philological  point  of  view, — is  probably  that  re- 
corded in  Mark  i.  9,  "  Jesus  Avas  baptized  by  John  «?  in 
Jordan."  Here  we  have  «?  Avith  the  accusative  case, 
after  the  verb  fi^tTrrn^o!,  and  it  is  the  only  instance  of  the 
kind  on  record  in  the  New  Testament:  a  more  common 
construction  is  the  dative  without  iv,  in,  alluding  to  the 
means,  and  never  to  the  manner  of  baptism ;  vide  Matt. 
iii.  6,  Mark  i.  5,  et  al.  If  then,  we  can  make  it  appear 
that  even  here  submersion  is  by  no  means  necessarily 
implied,  our  opponents  will  be  deprived  of  one  of  their 
strongest  philological  holds. 

1.  Let  it  then  be  borne  in  mind,  that  the  Greek  par- 
ticles are  frequently  interchanged,  i.  e.  one  is  often  used 
for  the  other;  every  Greek  scholar  is  aware  of  this  fact; 
and  this  is  manifestly  one  of  those  instances.  That  «<?, 
into,  is  substituted  for  tv,  in,  in  the  passage  in  question, 
is  abundantly  manifest  from  the  following  verse,  for  we 


200  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

are  there  told  that  "  Jesus  straightway  ascending — not 
out  of,  but  tTTofrom  the  water."  The  very  same  form 
of  expression  is  used  Matt.  iii.  16.  True,  our  English 
translation  reads,  "om^  of  the  water  ;"  but  every  person 
in  the  least  conversant  with  the  Greek,  knows  that  this  is 
wrong,  and  ihat  in  both  passages  it  ought  to  read  '■'■from 
(sLTTo)  the  water."  If  then,  our  Lord  ascended  not  out  of, 
hut  from  the  water,  up  the  bank  of  the  river,  we  conclude 
that  itc  into  must  have  been  put  for  ev  to  or  at,  and  that 
he  accordingly  had  not  been  in  the  water,  and  could  not 
have  been  submersed.  We  appeal  to  every  unbiassed 
scholar  for  the  legitimacy, — the  strict  propriety  of  this 
interpretation. 

3.  Again,  it  is  obvious  that  the  verb  in  this  case  defines 
the  sense  of  the  preposition,  and  not  the  preposition  that 
of  the  verb.  If  baptize  has  but  one  meaning,  and  that 
is  to  plunge,  then  "to  be  baptized  (««)  into  the  Jordan," 
must  imply  plunging ;  but  if  it  have  other  significations, 
which  has  been  a  thousand  times  incontrovertibly  proved  ; 
if,  for  instance  it  may  convey  the  idea  of  pouring,  sprink- 
ling, &c.,  then  it  results  with  equal  certainty,  that  to  be 
"  baptized  in  the  Jordan,"  implies  no  more  than  sprink- 
ling, because  we  are  told  in  the  sequel  that  the  individual 
baptized  went  up  the  bank,  not  out  of,  but  from,  the 
water;  hence  we  repeat,  that  «?  is  put  for  «v,  as  the  cor- 
responding t'TTo  proves.  Who  does  not  then  perceive, 
that  this  passage  can  only  be  made  to  favor  submersion 
upon  the  supposition  that  the  Greek  word  /SxTm^ai  signifies 
submersion  and  nothing  else ;  of  course  this  throws  the 
controversy  back  upon  the  import  of  the  verb  baptize, 
and  is  an  entire  abandonment  of  the  argument  derived  from 
the  preposition  e-'f.  It  is  accordingly  manifest,  that  tlie 
baptism  of  our  Lord  by  no  means  presents  a  clear  case  of 
total  plunging,  and  we  are  surprised  that  it  has  ever  been 
admitted  by  any  Greek  scholar. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

The  next  strongest  philological  instance  that  our 
Baptist  friends  can  produce,  is  that  contained  in  Acts  viii. 
3R,  "And  they  went  down  both  w  into  the  water,  both 
Philip  and  the  eunuch,"  &c.  The  fact  of  their  going 
into  the  water,  is  regarded  as  conclusive  evidence  of  sub- 
mersion ;  but  if  this  simple  fact  afford  such  evidence, 
then  Philip  must  have  been  submersed  also,  for  "  they 
went  down  both  into  the  water,  both  Philip  and  the 
eunuch;''^  this  argument  of  course  proves  too  much,  and 
therefore  by  common  consent,  fails  to  prove  any  thing. 
Moreover,  their  going  down  '■'■into  the  water"  did  not 
constitute  the  act  of  baptism,  for  that  act  is  said  to  have 
taken  place  subsequently,  and  is  described  by  another 
word,  which  implies  no  more  than  the  use  of  water  with- 
out determining  the  mode  in  which  it  was  used. 

But  we  have  a  still  stronger  argument  to  array  against 
the  case  before  us.  The  original  text  does  not  necessarily 
prove  that  Philip  and  the  eunuch  went  beyond  the  margin 
of  the  water.  The  phrase  ac  to  yJiiig  translated  "  into  the 
water"  may  with  equal  correctness  be  rendered,  "  to  the 
water."  A  few  examples  selected  from  a  great  number 
will  be  sufficient  to  establish  this  point.  Acts  xxvi.  14, 
"And  when  Ave"  (Saul  and  his  company)  "were  all 
fallen  m  to  the  earth"  not  into  the  earth.  John  xi.  38, 
"  Jesus  therefore  cometh  ««  to  (not  into)  the  tomb  of 
Lazarus."     John  xx.  3 — 8,  "  Peter  therefore  went  forth, 


202  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

and  that  other  disciple  and  came  nc  to  the  sepulchre.  So 
they  both  ran  together  ;  and  that  other  disciple  did  out- 
run Peter  and  came  first  uc  to  the  sepulchre,  *  *  yet 
went  he  not  ««  in."  Now  if  ei;  necessarily  means  into, 
we  must  read,  "  the  other  disciple  came  into  the  sepul- 
chre, yet  went  he  not  into,"  which  is  too  gross  an  absurd- 
ity to  be  tolerated  for  a  moment.  These  examples  are 
to  the  point ;  others  might  be  given,  but  it  is  not  import- 
ant. Any  person  avIio  is  at  all  conversant  with  his  Greek 
Testament  may  readily  satisfy  himself  as  to  the  use  of 
prepositions  by  the  New  Testament  writers.  If  therefore 
St;  TO  f^v)ifA.iiov  means  to  the  sepulchxe  and  «c  tuv  ynv  means  to 
tite  earth  :  the  preposition  merely  denoting  the  point  to 
tohich  the  motion  is  made,  so  also  may  «?  to  i/J^g  signify 
TO  the  ivater,  and  in  the  connexion  of  Acts  viii.  38,  may 
mean  no  more  than,  that  Philip  and  the  eunuch  both  went 
to  the  margin  of  the  icater? 

We  are  aware  that  it  will  be  said,  "They  both  come 
up  s«  out  q/'the  water,"  thus  implying  that  they  had  been 
previously  into  the  water.  But  it  is  probable  that  tx-  out 
of,  in  this  passage  stands  for  atto  from.  The  particle 
e'c  often  stands  in  contrast  with  tTro  instead  of  ix-,  in  pas- 
sages like  the  following  :  '■^^Trofrom  city  «?  to  city," — tTra 
from.  Jerusalem  s'?  fo  Jericho."  "The  way  that  goeth 
down  tTTofrom  Jerusalem  w  to  Gaza,"  &c.  We  have 
already  observed  that  both  Matthew  and  Mark  use  "-tto 
from,  instead  of  ^  out  of,  when  they  describe  the  act  of 
our  Saviour  in  leaving  the  water  after  baptism.  They 
simply  say,  he   came  from   the   water.     The   passage 

*The  appropriate  word  in  the  Greek  language  for  coming  up  out 
of  the  water,  is  aiv*  Jyai,  but  in  the  passage  before  us,  the  words  nctTt^ 
fins-etv  and  aviCna-etv  are  used,  which  express  the  action  not  of  enter- 
ing water,  &c.,  but  of  descending  or  mounting  trees,  horses,  hills,  &c. 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  203 

therefore  in  question,  is  a  solitary  case  in  the  history  of 
baptism  where  sji  is  put  in  contrast  with  n^-  This  circum- 
stance, to  say  the  least,  renders  their  testimony  to  the 
doctrine  of  immersion  extremely  unsatisfactory.  But 
furthermore,  it  is  well  known  that ««  is  often  used  to  denote 
simply  the  point  from  ivhich  a  motion  is  made.  Thus  : 
"  Howbeit,  there  came  other  boats  ek  from  Tiberias." 
"Get  thee  '.x-from  thy  kindred."  "  Who  shall  deliver 
me  f^from  the  body  of  this  death,"  &c.  (John  vi.  23, 
Acts  vii.  3,  Rom?^  vii.  24.)  It  would,  therefore,  be  every 
way  consistent  with  the  general  use  of  the  prepositions  in. 
question  to  read — "  and  they  went  down  both  to  the 
water  *  *  *  and  when  they  were  come  up  from  the  wa- 
ter," &c. 

Besides,  it  should  be  remembered,  that  the  act  of  coming 
out  of  the  water,  as  well  as  going  into  the  water,  is  affirmed 
of  both  Philip  and  the  eunuch,  and  has  no  more  to  do 
with  the  act  of  baptism  than  with  their  riding  in  the  char- 
iot. The  Greek  prepositions  employed  in  this  narration, 
have  the  same  latitude  of  meaning  of  our  English  into  and 
from  or  out  of.  And  in  popular  language,  a  person  goes 
into  the  Avater  when  he  enters  to  the  depth  of  six  inches ; 
and  when  he  recedes  from  that  point,  he  comes  o\it  of  the 
water.  Prof.  Ripley  here  proposes  a  question  that  is,  in- 
deed, singular  enough.  It  is,  whether  the  preposition  "c 
indicates  that  they  went  far  enough  into  the  water  for  immer- 
sion. How  each  a  question  is  to  be  determined  satisfac- 
torily, I  am  unable  to  judge.  Certain  it  is  that  philology 
can  never  settle  it.  But  while  the  subject  of  the  eunuch's 
baptism  is  before  the  reader,  we  will  adduce  a  few  consid- 
erations which  may  tend  to  corroborate  the  foregoing 
statements,  and  show  that  an  immersion  was  not  probably 
practised  on  this  occasion. — And, 


204  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

1.  The  place  where  the  eunuch  was  baptized  was 
"  desert,''^  vide  verse  26.  The  word  desert  in  Scripture, 
sometimes  means  a  barren  waste  and  sometimes  merely  a 
country  place  in  contradistinction  of  a  city.  The  former 
is  probably  the  true  sense  in  this  connection.  For  when 
the  angel  said  to  Philip  :  "  Arise  and  go  toward  the  south 
unto  the  way  that  goeth  down  from  Jerusalem  to  Gaza 
which  is  desert,''''  if  he  intended  merely  a  country  place, 
the  description  would  have  been  trifling.  It  was  already 
understood  as  a  matter  of  course  by  Philip,  that  the 
place  was  rural,  but  that  it  was  a  desert  proper,  might  not 
have  been  so  obvious.  But  to  find  a  body  of  water  in  a 
desert  proper,  sufficient  for  immersion,  would  be  strange 
indeed. 

2.  The  body  of  water  itself  in  which  the  eunuch  was 
baptized.  The  account  says,  "they  czme  ^^ri  m  vS\^g  to 
some  water.^'  No  more  or  less  can  be  made  of  Luke's 
statement.  But  what  is  so?we  water  ?  How  much  ?  The 
pronoun  ft  (some,  any,)  has  sometimes  a  diminutive  sense, 
and  so  here,  "  they  came  to  a  little  water,"  &c.  Our 
English  reads,  "  a  certain  water."  As  if  our  translators 
had  in  view  a  particular  watering  place  for  travellers  or 
caravans.  And  so  the  eunuch,  when  he  saw  it,  ex- 
claimed, with  evident  emotion,  '^(.^  vS'oeg  behold  water. 
He  does  not  say  how  much  water,  but  seemed  a  little  sur- 
prised and  pleased  to  find  any  water  in  such  a  place. 
Indeed,  it  was  in  this  vicinity — in  the  valley  of  Gerar — 
the  valley  in  which,  according  to  our  most  accurate  maps, 
the  city  of  Gaza  stands — that  Abraham  and  Isaac  were 
obliged  to  dig  wells  to  procure  water  for  their  flocks.  It 
was  here  that  "  the  herdmen  of  Gerar  did  strive  with 
Isaac's  herdmen,  saying.  The  water  is  ours  "  It  could 
not  have  been  far  from  this  place  where  Philip  baptized 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  205 

the  eunuch.  We  sometimes,  in  Scripture,  read  of 
"  springs  in  the  desert,"  boiling  out  of  the  ground,  (Gen. 
xxvi.  19,)  and  it  was  probably  such  a  body  of  water  in 
which  the  eunuch  was  baptized.  Whence  then,  has 
arisen  all  this  fancied  abundance  of  water  sufficient  for 
an  immersion,  where  herdmen  would  contend  for  a 
"  welV^  to  water  their  flocks  ? — The  reasonable  presump- 
tion is  against  it.     We  want  more  proof.' 

'See  "  Greek  Particles"  by  the  Rev.  F.  G.  Hibbard. 


18 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

Having  as  we  believe,  irrefragibly  established  the  fact, 
that  so  far  as  the  literal  words,  employed  to  designate 
baptism,  are  concerned,  the  New  Testament  affords  not 
the  slightest  proof  of  its  dispensation  among  the  early 
Christians  by  submersion ;  we  proceed  to  examine  whe- 
ther such  proof  can  be  derived  from  the  circumstances 
attendant  on  its  administration.  In  prosecuting  this 
examination  we  must  necessarily  inquire  into  the  mode 
practised  by  the  first  heralds  of  Christianity. 

I.    JOHN    THE    baptist's   MODE. 

We  have  already  sufficiently  explained  our  views  on 
the  character  of  John's  baptism  ;^  at  present  its  mode  is 
the  subject  of  investigation.  It  is  not  indeed  a  matter  of 
very  great  importance,  what  was  John's  mode,  any  fur- 
ther than  it  may  tend  to  reflect  light  on  the  practical  ap- 
plication of  the  word  f*^?^^*;  for  it  has  already  been  am- 
ply established  that  his  baptism  was  by  no  means  the 
Christian  sacrament  known  by  that  name,  and  can  there- 
fore have  no  direct  influence  in  fixing  the  gospel  method 
of  the  baptism  instituted  by  Christ.  But  while  we  can 
readily  account  for  the  fact  that  our  Baptist  brethren, 
should  have  so  eagerly  imbibed  the  idea  that  John  per- 
formed his  baptism  by  submersion,  we  must  confess  that 
we  are  astonished  that  any  one  of  those  who  hold  to  the 
mode  by  aspersion,  should  have  ever  yielded  to  this 
assumption,  since   the   supposed  evidence   on  which  it 

'See  p.  132,  sqq. 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  207 

is  based,  is  in  all  its  points  so  extremely  vague  and 
deficient. 

Before  stating  the  arguments  in  support  of  our  view, 
we  shall  notice  the  most  plausible  of  those,  brought  for- 
ward in  defence  of  the  hypothesis  that  John  submersed. 
They  are  the  folloAving: 

First, — "  John  baptized  in  Enon  near  to  Salim,  because 
there  was  much  water  there;'" — therefore  he  baptized 
by  submersion. 

Secondly, — John  baptized  '■'■in  Jordan;''''^ — therefore 
he  baptized  by  submersion. 

Thirdly, — When  John  had  baptized  Jesus,  it  is  said 
that  "  he  (Jesus)  went  up  straightway  out  of  the  water  ;"^ 
— therefore  John  must  have  submersed  him. 

This  kind  of  logic  may  indeed  prove  satisfactory  to 
some,  but  we  frankly  confess  we  cannot  participate  in  a 
faith  which  has  no  better  evidence  for  its  foundation. 
We  might  reply  to  it  in  the  same  superficial  strain, — 
thus : 

First, — John  baptized  in  the  wilderness  where  there 
was  much  sand  ; — therefore  he  plunged  them  under  the 
sand. 

Secondly, — The  apostle  baptized  the  jailor  in  prison 
where  there  was  little  water ; — therefore  he  sprinkled  him. 

Thirdly, — When  Christ  was  about  to  be  baptized,  it  is 
said  he  "  went  to  Jordan  ;"'' — therefore  he  could  not  have 
plunged. 

We  readily  concede  that  this  mode  of  refutation  is  in- 
conclusive, but  not  more  so  than  the  pretended  argument 
to  which  it  is  a  reply ;  and  we  only  state  the  case  thus, 
to  expose  more  fully  the  sophistry  of  such  reasoning,  and 
the  dexterous  facility  with  which  our  opponents  leap  at 
•  'John  iii.  2—3.       ^iohn  iii.  6.       ^jyiatt.  iii.  16.        "Matt.  iii.  13 


108  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

conclusions  in  support  of  their  cause.  But  the  subject 
demands  a  more  serious  examination. 

Why,  it  is  triumphantly  asked,  did  John  choose  a  place 
for  administering  baptism,  where  there  was  "  much  water" 
if  he  merely  sprinkled  the  people  ? — just  as  if  there  could 
have  been  no  possible  necessity  for  a  copious  supply  of 
water,  at  a  place  in  a  warm  climate  where  vast  concourses 
of  people  assembled,  except  for  the  purpose  of  submer- 
sion !  In  return,  we  might  ask :  Why  do  our  Methodist 
brethren  make  it  a  point,  when  convenient,  to  hold  their 
camp-meetings  in  the  vicinity  of  a  running  stream,  or  a 
large  spring,  or  of  some  other  abundant  supply  of  water  ? 
is  it  because  they  are  in  the  habit,  or  that  they  may  have 
an  opportunity,  of  plunging  under  the  water,  all  the  in- 
fants and  adult  converts  who  may  be  baptized  on  such 
occasions  ?  Or  Avhy  are  similar  locations  preferred  for 
the  celebration  of  American  independence  on  the  fourth 
of  July  ? — The  same  answer  will  furnish  a  satisfactory 
solution  to  each  of  the  queries.  But  the  fact  is,  we  are 
not  bound  to  point  out  the  real  cause  of  John's  choosing 
such  a  region.  If  any  man  assert  that  it  wasybr  the  pur- 
pose of  submersion  only,  why  let  him  prove  it, — the 
o?ius  probmidi  rests  with  him.  We  have  not,  like  our 
opposing  brethren,  taken  upon  us  any  such  responsibility. 

Let  us  however,  notwithstanding,  inquire  whether  a 
sufficient  reason  cannot  be  assigned,  apart  from  the  idea 
of  submersion.  That  it  was  with  a  view  to  submersion, 
is  altogether  a  gratuitous  assumption  ;  the  Bible  itself  no 
where  states  this  or  even  hints  at  it,  but  leaves  us  to  con- 
jecture the  motive  by  the  light  of  circumstances.  Ob- 
serve then, — 

1.  That  in  that  country  the  mercury  ranges,  in  winter^ 
from  40°  to  50°  and,  in  summer,  from  80°  to  100°,  and  in 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  109 

the  plains  of  Jordan  where  John  had  been  baptizin<r 
much  higher.  Water  therefore,  was  in  constant  demand, 
not  merely  for  baptism  but  more  especially  for  the  use 
of  the  people  and  their  beasts.  And  this  necessity  John 
must  foresee  and  provide  for,  Avhenever  he  would  fix  his 
position  for  baptizing,  unless  he  would  be  reckless  of  the 
comfort  and  even  endanger  the  lives  of  the  people. 

2.  That  Enon,  by  its  name,  imports  a  single  spring- 
-  the  fountain  of  On;"  but  it  flowed  in  several  or  many 
streams.     The  original  phrase,  ttokkcl  .cT^^t*  is  in  the  plu- 
ral, and  every  Greek  scholar  knows  that  it  ought  to  be 
translated   not    "much    water,"    but   many   waters   or 
streams;^  and  this  rendering  would  also   express  more 
correctly  the  various  rivulets  in  that  region,  all  emanating 
from  the  same  fountain.     The  same  word  v6...  occurs  in 
an  oration  of  Demosthenes  against  Callicles,  at  the  com- 
mencement, p.  1272  ult.  of  Reiske's  ed.  and  p.  275,  vol 
viu.  Dobson's  "  Oratores  Attica,"  where  the  context  and 
whole  object  of  the  oration  render  it  certain  that  it  desig- 
nates  ''  rains-     If  then  ^^..^waters-can  imply  drops 
of  water  falling  as  rain,  why  must  we  at  once  enlarcre 
Uiese  vs...,  where  John  abode,  into  deep  waters  or  riv- 
ers?    We  would  describe  any  river,  lake  or  sea  as  con- 
sisting not  of  ''many  waters,"  (a  rather  singular  expres- 
sion  m  such  a  case,)  but  of  deep  waters.     If  then  we 
here  find  "many  waters"  ("  much  water"  in  our  English 
Bible),  and  if   ''  waters"  may  be  rain  as  well  as  seas,  then 
we  can  lawfully  understand  them  to  be  only  sprinos  or 
fountains.     Had  the  idea  of  dipping  existed  in  the  mind 
of  the  sacred  writer,  he  would  surely  have  spoken  rather 
of  deep  than  of  many  waters.     Indeed  it  is  evident  that 

JcrRe^riT;^™^  ''^"^'  ^^^'^'"^'^"  other  places,  for.- 


210  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

these  springs  of  water  were  not  used  for  dipping,  since 
three  thousand  were  baptized  in  Jerusalem,  Avhere  no  deep 
waters  were  found.*  Thus  the  Baptizer  made  choice 
of  a  place  where  there  was  a  good  supply  of  water  inter- 
spersing the  neighborhood  with  a  number  of  running 
brooks,  of  which  the  people  as  well  as  their  camels  and 
asses  might  drink.  This  idea  is  supported  by  travellers 
who  have  visited  that  region. 

3.  That  John  had  previously  been  baptizing  at  the 
Jordan  near  Bethabara.  But  the  water  of  that  stream  is 
always  turbid  and  black  and  unfit  to  drink  until  it  has 
stood  several  hours  in  vessels  and  settled.  Hence  the 
Jordan  was  sometimes  called,  by  the  Greeks,  ,wsAa?,  which 
signifies  black.  The  multitudes,  therefore,  that  thronged 
to  John's  baptism  at  Bethabara  were  probably  inade- 
quately supplied  with  wholesome  water,  which  deter- 
mined his  course  northward,  to  Enon,  where  this  incon- 
venience might  be  obviated. 

4.  That  John  had  left  Bethabara  where  there  was  more 
water,  for  Enon,  where  there  was  much  water.  Why 
should  it  be  said  that,  because  there  was  much  water  at 
Enon,  he  chose  that  place  for  baptism,  when  he  had  all 
along  baptized  at  Bethabara,  where  the  Jordan  is  much 
broader,  and  there  was  a  much  larger  quantity  of  water? 
If  the  mere  quantity  of  water  is  to  be  understood,  we 
can  assign  no  reason  why  John  preferred  Enon  to  Beth- 
abara, and  the  passage  in  question  is  perfectly  enigmat- 
ical. But,  if  Enon  was  supplied  with  fresh  running 
streamlets  suited  to  the  necessities  of  so  vast  a  multitude  as 
followed  John,  then  we  perceive  a  reason  why  he  should 
select  such  a  location  and  also  a  propriety  in  the  transla- 
tion we  have  adopted. 

See  Essays  on  Baptism  by  Rev.  Prof.  C.  F.  SchaefFer. 


MODE    OF   BAPTISM.  211 

Now  then,  let  us  recapitulate ;  the  climate  was  warm 
and  oppressive,   and  pure  fresh  water  was  scarce  and 
of  great  value;  the  multitude  of  people  was  immense, 
amounting  probably  to  hundreds  of  thousands  ;  for  "  there 
went  out  unto  him,  all  the  land  of  Judea  and  they  of  Je- 
rusalem, and  were  all  baptized,'"  and  no  doubt  many 
travelled  thither  with  camels  and  asses,  and  remained  on 
the  spot  at  least  one  night,  and  hence  much  water  was 
absolutely  necessary  for  other  purposes  than  that  of  sub- 
mersion; John  had  just  before  been  baptizing  in  the  vi- 
cinity of  Jordan,  where  there  was  more  water  than  at 
Enon,  but  it  was  unfit  for  immediate  use ;  hence  he  went 
from  a  large  body  of  ivater,  to  a  situation  where  the 
supply  loas  coynparatively  small,  but  notwithstanding, 
preferable  on  account  of  its  quality.     And  does  not  this 
sufficiently  account  for  the  fact  under  consideration,  with- 
out the  slightest  necessity  of  resorting  to  submersion? 
If  total  plunging  had  been  the  practice  and  the  "much 
water"  had  been  required  for  that  object,  would  it  not 
have  been  wiser  in  John  to  remain  at  Bethabara,  and 
does  not  his  departure  from  a  location  of  more  ivater  to 
one  of  much  water  rather  disprove  the  doctrine  of  such 
plunging  ?     This  passage  then,  so  often  quoted  by  Bap- 
tists as  favoring  their  views,  is  found  to  have  no  possible 
connection  with  the  point  at  issue,  or  if  it  have,  it  fur- 
nishes an  argument  against  submersion.     But  to  say  the 
least,  it  leaves  the  question  as  to  John's  mode  of  bap- 
tizing, just  where  Ave  found  it. 

'Matt.  iii.  5 — 6,  Mark  i.  5, — It  is  calculated  upon  correct  data, 
that  in  the  days  of  David  the  population  of  Palestine  could  not  have 
been  less  than  six  millions  seven  hundred  thousand,  and  in  the  time 
of  John  it  amounted  to  something  like  six  millions,  and  of  these  at 
least  one  half  (three  millions)  must  have  been  babtized  by  John, 
See  Mode  of  Babtism  by  Rev.  Mr.  Hibbard,  Aub.  Jour. 


312  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

"But"  continue  our  opponents,  "  does  not  Matthew 
tell  us,  chap.  iii.  6,  that  on  other  occasions  "  they  were 
baptized  of  him  in  Jordan?  We  answer  no.  It  is  not 
tlie  old  English  language  but  the  original  Greek  which 
must  decide.  We  appeal  to  the  text  to  which  we  have 
just  now  referred.  How  could  they  be  baptized  "of" 
him  ?  In  modern  English  we  would  say  "by"  him.  If  an 
English  preposition  may,  or  rather  did  express  in  the 
time  of  King  James,  the  two  different  ideas  of  "by" 
and  "  of,"  why  is  it  difficult  to  conceive  that  a  Greek 
preposition  may  have  different  shades  of  meaning?  It 
is  well  known  how  much  the  meanings  of  Greek  prepo- 
sitions vary.  *  *  *  This  can  perhaps  be  made  intelligible 
even  to  one  unacquainted  with  the  Greek  language.  The 
word  in  question  is  in  Greek  '-v  rendered  here,  "in." 
But  the  same  word  stands  in  a  similar  connection  in  Luke 
xiii.  4,  where  our  Saviour  speaks  of  the  tower  "  in  Siloam." 
Siloam  was  a  well  known  pool  of  water,  in  which  our  Sa- 
viour directed  a  man  born  blind  to  wash,  (John  ix.  7,)  that 
is,  his  eyes,  for  the  word  translated  "wash"  is  appropri- 
ated to  the  washing  of  the  hands,  feet,  face,  &c.,  and  seems 
to  exclude  the  idea  of  bathing,  for  which  there  are  other 
appropriate  words.  The  instances  in  Bretschneider's 
Lexicon,  given  under  the  word  yi?rra),  substantiate  this 
remark.  In  the  other  five  chapters  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment where  it  occurs,  (according  to  the  Greek  Concordance 
of  E.  Schmidius,)  it  is  uniformly  and  expressly  applied 
to  the  washing  of  the  face,  feet,  or  hands.  The  pool  was 
too  shallow  to  have  allowed  a  bathing  of  the  whole  body, 
and  hence  this  word  vitttoi,  is  used.  This  same  pool  is 
mentioned  in  Nehemiah  iii.  15,  where  the  Hebrew  ter- 
mination, as  in  numberless  instances,  differs  from  the 
Greek.     The  pool  lay  to  the  east  of  Jerusalem,  and  the 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  213" 

tower  stood  near  it,  Avhich  is  meant  by  the  word  (v. 
Thus  too  we  read,  Heb.  x.  12,  Christ  "  sat  down  on  the 
right  hand  of  God."  Here  the  same  word  occurs.  Now 
if  we  must  translate  "  in  "  Jordan,  we  must  translate,  he 
sat  down  "  in  "  the  right  hand  of  God,  for  the  word  is 
the  same  in  both  cases.  But  as  we,  of  course,  translate 
it  "at"  or  "by"  the  right  hand,  &c.,  so  too  we  must 
translate  "  at  "  or  "  by  "  the  Jordan.  Still,  it  may  be 
said,  that  John  must  have  immersed  our  Saviour,  for  we 
read,  Matt.  iii.  16,  "And  Jesus,  when  he  was  baptized, 
went  up  straightway  out  of  the  water."  Here  we  remark 
that  Matthew  does  not  say  that  Christ  went  into  the  Jor- 
dan, but,  v.  13,  only  "to"  it.  The  question  is,  how 
did  he  then  come  out  of  the  river?  The  English  words 
"  went  up,"  are  expressed  by  one  compound  Greek 
word,  a-vi.Sn,  and  the  words  "  out  of"  by  the  simple  word 
ctTTc.  We  will  endeavor  to  explain  the  proper  rendering 
of  these  words  to  the  English  reader.  Luke  tells  us, 
xix.  4,  that  Zaccheus,  in  order  to  have  a  better  view  of 
our  Saviour,  "  climbed  up  "  a  tree.  The  Greek  for 
"  climbed  up"  is  ^n/2n,  the  identical  word,  in  the  same 
person,  number,  tense,  mood  and  voice,  Avhich  occurs  in 
Matt.  iii.  16.  The  reader  will  observe  that  the  idea  of 
ascending,  climbing,  &c.,  is  connected  with  avsS^.  That 
is,  Jesus  ascended,  climbed  up,  the  extensive  acclivity 
which  stretches  forth  to  a  considerable  distance  from  the 
bed  of  the  river. ^  The  Jordan  had  high  banks;  and 
hence  in  the  prophet  Jeremiah,  xlix.  19,  the  lion  is  said 
"to  come  up  from  the  swelling"  of  Jordan,  not  as  if  he 
were  an  amphibious  animal,  coming  oid  of  the  water,  but 
up  from  its  vicinity.  Again,  ^.tto  is  in  Matt.  iii.  16,  trans- 
lated "  out  of."  But  it  should  be  translated  simply 
'See  Home's  Introd.  vol,  iii.  p.  35. 


214  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

''from.''* — Let  us  endeavor  to  prove  this  assertion.  The 
word  ctTTo  occurs,  for  example,  Acts  xii.  10.  When  the 
angel  who  delivered  Peter  out  of  the  prison,  had  conduct- 
ed him  through  the  iron  gate  and  one  street,  he  "  forth- 
with departed/rom  him."  But  now,  if  we  must  translate 
"  out  of  "  Jordan,  then,  to  be  consistent,  we  must  necessa- 
rily translate  the  same  word  ^^ro  thus :  The  angel  departed 
"  out  of**  Peter,  Avhich  of  course  does  not  apply — the 
angel  at  his  side,  simply  went  away.  To  save  room  we 
omit  other  examples. 

The  baptism  of  Jesus,  by  John,  after  these  explanations, 
may  be  thus  viewed:  He  Avent  to  John,  who  Avas  in 
the  vicinity  of  the  river,  in  order  to  procure  water  with 
ease  in  a  vessel,  whenever  he  was  requested  to  baptize, — 
Christ  kneeled  down  perhaps,  and  then,  to  signify  the 
act  of  anointing,  he  took  water  (for  neither  oil  nor  Avater 
had  any  peculiar  spiritual  efficacy,  and  were  hence  of 
equal  value)  and  poured  it  on  the  head  of  our  SaA'iour, 
signifying  perhaps  likewise  the  out-pouring  of  the  Spirit, 
Avhich  at  the  time  did  descend.  After  his  baptism,  Jesus 
ascended  or  climbed  up  the  acclivity,  and  went  simply 
aAvay  "from"  the  region  of  Jordan. 

We  have  read  of  no  dipping,  of  nothing  that  could 
favor  such  an  idea.  Why  should  John  have  dipped  our 
Saviour  ?  Certainly  not  in  allusion  to  the  burial  of  the 
latter,  for  he  Avas  not  yet  dead,  and  hence,  had  he  dipped 
him,  it  would  have  seemed  as  much  out  of  place,  as  if 
he  had  administered  to  him  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's 
supper,  before  it  Avas  instituted. 

There  is  one  expression  in  Matt.  iii.  16,  Avhich  needs 
a  passing  remark.  The  translation,  "  he  shall  baptize 
you  with  the  Holy  Ghost,"  has  been  occasionally  im- 
pugned ;  but  it  is  a  most  successful  version.     When  Ave 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  215 

read  in  Matt.  xxvi.  53,  (we  take  an  instance  designedly 
from  the  same  M'riter,)  "  they  that  take  the  sword  shall 
perish  ivith  the  sword,"  we  see  at  once  that  with  or  by 
can  be  the  only  word  appropriately  prefixed  to  "sword." 
The  same  word  is  in  the  former  passage  prefixed  to 
"  Holy  Ghost,"  and  hence  it  is  correctly  rendered 
"  with"  or  "  by  the  Holy  Ghost."' 

'See  Essajrs  on  Baptism  by  Rev.  Prof.  Schaeffer. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

A  STRONG  argument  that  John  could  not,  in  the  nature 
of  things,  have  baptized  by  submersion,  may  be  deduced 
from  the  shortness  of  the  time  employed  by  him,  in  ad- 
ministering the  rite  to  such  immense  multitudes. 

It  has  already  been  remarked  that  from  detailed  calcu- 
lations, made  from  the  best  data,  he  baptized  at  least  half 
the  nation,  for  he  was  received  by  the  Jews  as  a  nation ; 
there  was  no  such  division  of  public  sentiment  in  regard 
to  him  as  prevailed  in  reference  to  Jesus  Christ.  Phari- 
sees and  Sadducees,  Jerusalem  and  all  Judea,  and  all 
THE  REGION  ROUND  ABOUT  JoRDAN,  Submitted  to  his  bap- 
tism, ambitious  of  the  distinction  thus  conferred,  and  all 
parties  coalesced  in  the  popular  sentiment  that  John  was 
a  divine  prophet.  "  He  was  a  burning  and  a  shining 
light,  and  the  Jews  were  willing  for  a  season  to  rejoice 
in  his  light. "^ 

On  a  careful  examination  it  appears  that  John's  minis- 
try did  not  last  longer  than  nine  months  ;  but  we  will 
extend  it  to  ten  months,  as  the  utmost  limit  to  which  it 
can  be  prolonged  with  any  shadow  of  evidence.^ 

Uosephus  the  great  Jewish  historian  informs  us  that  there  were 
so  many  that  followed  Jolin,  that  Herod  the  Tetrarch,  fearing  an 
insurrection  among  the  people,  apprehended  John  and  caused  him 
to  be  executed. 

*The  duration  of  John's  ministry  has  been  variously  estimated ; 
some  have  extended  it  to  eighteen  months,  while  others  have  limited 
it  to  less  than  half  that  period.     We  have  fixed  it  at  ten  months, 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  217 

Now  make  allowance  for  the  time  employed  in  intro- 
ducing himself  to  the  people, — preaching  to  them,  Sic, 
also  for  the  time  lost  during  the  winter  season,  embracing 

not  because  a  medium  between  extremes  is  more  likely  to  be  correct, 
but  chiefly  because  an  investigation  of  the  subject  has  satisfied  us  that 
tliis  estimate  approximates  nearest  to  the  truth.  The  Rev.  Mr.  Hib- 
bard  has  bestowed  considerable  research  on  this  question,  and  his 
opinion  is  therefore  entitled  to  our  respect.  "According,"  says  he, 
'•  to  Lukeiii.  1,  John  opened  his  pubhc  ministry  in  the  fifteenth  year  of 
tire  reign  of  Tiberius  Cfesar,  (reckoning  the  three  years  of  his  reign 
conjointly  with  Augustus,)  which,  according  to  our  most  approved 
cln-onology,  answers  to  the  thirtieth  of  John's  life.  It  is  generally 
agreed  by  chronologers  that  our  Saviour  was  born  December  25th, 
A.  M.  4,000.  John  the  Baptist  was  six  months  older  than  Christ, 
(vide  Lukei.  30 — 36  compared  with  verse  13,)  and  consequently,  was 
bom  the  24th  of  June  previously.  Allowing  then,  Jolm  to  have 
opened  his  ministry  at  the  age  of  thirty,  in  the  latter  part  of  June, 
year  of  the  Vulgar  era,  26  ;  and  supposing,  as  Luke  says,  (chap.  iii. 
21 — 23,)  Jesus  was  baptized  when  he  was  thirty  years  of  age,  i.  e. 
about  December  25th  of  the  same  year,'  it  would  then  follow  that 
John  had  been  engaged  six  months  in  his  public  ministry  at  the 
time  of  Christ's  baptism.  How  long  John  continued  baptizing  sub- 
sequently to  this  period,  we  are  not  definitely  informed.  But  from 
a  careful  collation  of  facts,  we  can  safely  limit  the  period  of  his 
after  labors  to  four  months. 

"The  last  account  we  have  of  Jolxn,  previously  to  his  imprison- 
ment, states  that  he  was  '  baptizing  at  Enon  near  to  Salim.'  Jolm 
iii.  23.  This  was  immediately  after  our  Lord  had  attended  his  first 
passover,  which  was  celebrated  on  the  fourteenth  day  of  the  month 
•Nisan,  which,  as  the  Jews  reckoned  their  ,  years  by  lunar  months, 
answers  to  the  moon  of  our  March.  As  a  necessary  consequence  of 
tlieir  reckoning  time  by  the  phases  of  the  moon,  the  celebration  of 
their  passover  sometimes  fell  on  the  latter  half  of  the  month  of 
March,  and  sometimes  on  the  fore  part  of  April.    We  cannot  there- 

'I  suppose  it  will  be  understood  that  the  birth  of  Christ  is  reckoned 
to  have  actually  taken  place  four  years  (strictly  three  years  and  six 
days)  before  the  commencement  of  the  Vulgar  era,  or  Anno  Domini. 
19 


218  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

Storms,  rains,  «fec.;  also  for  the  time  occupied  in  movinor 
from  place  to  place  ;  also  for  forty-three  sabbaths  on 
which  according  to  Jewish  notions,  it  was  not  lawful  to 

fore  be  exact  to  a  day  ;  but  by  closely  following  the  circumstancea 
in  the  evangelist 's  history,  we  shall  arrive  at  a  reasonable  certainty 
that  John  did  not  continue  his  ministry  beyond  the  period  above 
assigned  him.  The  whole  chain  of  facts  runs  thus  :  After  Jesus  was 
baptized  he  went  into  Galilee,  where,  on  the  third  day  after  his 
arrival,  he  attended  the  marriage  at  Cana.  John  ii.  1 .  After  this 
he  went  to  Capernaum,  where  he  staid  '  not  many  days,  verse  12. 
Leaving  Capernaum,  he  returned  into  Judea  to  attend  the  passover 
at  Jerusalem,  verse  13.  Here  he  purged  the  temple  (verse  14)  and 
held  conversation  with  Nicodemus,  chap.  iii.  1 — 21.  Leaving  the 
city  of  Jerusalem,  he  went  out  into  the  province  of  Judea,  and  bap- 
tized, verse  22.  At  this  time  '  John  also  was  baptizing  at  Enon 
near  to  Salim,'  (verse  23,)  about  twenty  miles  distant.  Their  mu- 
tual proximity  and  the  increasing  popularity  of  Jesus  led  to  dis- 
putes among  the  Jews,  (verses  26,  26,)  and  excited  the  jealousy 
and  malice  of  the  Pharisees,  chap.  iv.  1 — 3.  '  When  therefore,  the 
Lord  knew  how  the  Pharisees  had  heard  that  Jesus  made  and  bap- 
tized more  disciples  than  John, — he  left  Judea  and  departed  into  Gal- 
ilee.' Here  then,  it  is  stated  that  Jesus  '  departed  into  Galilee,' 
while  John  was  in  the  vicinity  of  Enon,  baptizing,  immediately  after 
the  first  passover  which  our  Lord  attended,  i.  e.  the  latter  part  of 
Mai'ch,  A.  D.  27,  nine  months  after  John  had  commenced  his  pub- 
lic ministry.  But,  by  comparing  Matt.  iv.  12,  we  find  tliat  Jesus 
did  not  depart  into  Galilee  at  this  time,  until  after  '  he  had  heard 
that  John  was  cast  into  prison.'  The  conclusion  therefore  is,  that 
John  was  arrested  during  his  stay  at  Enon ;  and  Jesus,  in  view  of 
the  commotion  excited  in  Judea  by  that  event,  and  also  of  the  con- 
troversies going  on  tliore,  concerning  himself  and  John,  prudently 
withdrew,  for  a  season,  into  the  remoter  parts  of  Galilee 

"  Various  circumstances  corroborate  this  ccuclusicn.  It  is  evi- 
dent, both  from  Josephus  and  the  New  Testament,  that  John  was 
arrested  by  Herod  Antipas,  governor  of  Galilee  and  Perea.  But 
Enon  lay  at  the  southern  extremity  of  Herod's  dominions  on  the 
west  of  the  Jordan  ;  therefore,  if  John  had  been  south  of  Enon,  ud 
would  have  been  beyond  the  jurisdiction  of  Herod.     And,  as  we 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  219 

baptize,  and  we  have  left  about  two  hundred  and  twenty- 
seven  days  in  which  we  may  suppose  he  exercised  the 
function  of  his  mission. 

If  he  submersed  his  disciples  according  to  the  modern 
mode,  he  could  not  have  thus  labored  more  than  six  hours 
per  day,  standing  all  the  time  in  three  feet  depth  of  water; 
and  according  to  this  estimate,  the  whole  number  of  hours 
employed  in  the  act  of  baptizing  amounted  to  one  thou- 
sand three  hundred  and  sixty-two ;  which  would  average 
two  thousand  two  hundred  and  two  per  hour,  thirty-six 
per  minute,  or  a  little  over  one  in  every  two  seconds  ! — 
and  he  must  have  pursued  these  labors  in  the  same  rapid 
ratio  during  six  hours  every  day,  for  the  space  of  tM'^o 
hundred  and  twenty-seven  days  ! 

But  Ave  are  bound  to  concede  to  the  administration  of 
John's  baptism,  some  degree  of  solemnity,  and  he  could 
not  have  averaged  during  six  hours  per  day  for  two  hun- 
dred and  twenty-seven  days,  more  than  one  person  in 

never  read  of  Jolin's  going  north  of  that  place,  we  conclude  he  was 
arrested  at  Enon. 

"  Again,  our  Lord  did  not  fully  open  his  mission  until  after  Jolm 
weis  cast  into  prison.  Matt.  iv.  12 — 17.  The  popularity  of  John 
presented  an  impediment  to  the  ministry  of  the  Saviour.  Indeed  it 
is  natural  to  suppose  tliat  two  such  great  characters,  laboring  in  the 
vicinity  of  each  other,  would  inevitably  produce  a  great  division  of 
public  sentiment.  Jesus  therefore  prudently  withdrew  himself  until 
John  had  '  fulfilled  his  course.'  But  from  the  nature  of  the  case, 
he  cannot  be  supposed  to  have  then  withheld  long, — the  object  of  hia 
mission  being  of  such  paramomit  importance  to  that  of  Jolm's. 

"  Thus  have  we  followed  Jolm,  in  his  public  ministry,  during  the 
space  of  nine  months.  He  had  introduced  Christ  to  the  Jews,  and 
having  thus  fulfilled  the  object  of  his  mission,  (Jolm  i.  31,)  he  re- 
tired by  a  singular  providence,  from  the  field  of  his  labor  some  time 
in  the  month  of  April,  A.  D.  27.  That  he  continued  his  ministry 
longer  than  about  nine  months  cannot  be  proved  from  the  Bible." 


220  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

every  two  minutes ;  and  this  would  make  forty  thousand 
six  hundred  and  sixty  persons  in  ten  months, — not  one 
thirteenth  part  as  many  inhabitants,  as,  according  to  Jo- 
sephus,  perished  at  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  about  forty 
years  afterwards  ;  and  at  this  rate  it  would  have  occupied 
something  like  fifty  years  to  baptize  all  who  applied  to 
him  ! — Or  let  us  suppose  he  could  submerse  with  becom- 
ing solemnity,  one  every  minute,  and  it  would  have  em- 
ployed him  not  much  short  of  twenty -five  years  ! 

We  will  not  increase  the  difficulty  by  alluding  to  a 
change  of  raiment, — dressing  and  undressing  of  males 
and  females,  or  their  moving  to  and  fro  dripping  in  their 
garments,  either  of  Avhich  would  have  been  indecent; 
since  the  M'hole  transaction  is  already  impossible  enough 
without  this  allusion. — But  let  us  suppose  that  John 
sprinkled  them  with  a  "  hyssop  branch,"  dipped  in  the 
water,  as  they  passed  before  him  in  ranks,  and  all  diffi- 
culty at  once  vanishes.  This  mode  of  dedicating  the 
people  of  God  was,  moreover,  actually  known  among 
the  Jews  and  had  been  practised  on  one  of  the  most 
grand  and  impressive  occasions  ever  known  to  that  peo- 
ple, viz.  that  of  the  ratification  of  the  covenant  between 
God  and  them.  (Exo.  xxiv.  8.)  Thus  Paul,  (Heb.  ix. 
19)  "  For  when  Moses  had  spoken  every  precept  to  all 
the  people  according  to  the  law,  he  took  the  blood  of 
calves  and  of  goats  with  water  and  scarlet  wool  and 
hyssop  and  sprinkled  both  the  book  and  all  the  people." 
It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  when  Moses  sprinkled  "  all 
the  people,"  they  numbered  six  hundred  thousand  fight- 
ing men,  which,  by  reckoning  five  persons  that  did  not 
bear  arms,  to  every  warrior  would  leave  an  aggregrate 
population  of  three  million.  These  Moses  sprinkled, 
probably  as  the  priest  was  required  to  do  on  another  oc- 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  221 

rasion,  "  with  a  stick  of  cedar  wood  upon  which  a  bunch 
of  hyssop  was  tied  with  a  scarlet  thread."  John  made 
no  innovation  in  the  Mosaic  rites — he  instituted  no  new 
forms  of  religion  among  the  Jews,  but  applied  only  those 
which  he  found  already  established. 

From  the  preceding  remarks  it  is  evident  that  the 
practice  of  John  affords  nothing  like  satisfactory  proof 
that  he  baptized  by  submersion  ;  if  however  he  even  had, 
his  example  in  this  particular  would  possess  no  binding 
force  on  us,  as  will  hereafter  be  made  sufficiently  clear. 
But  this  not  being  the  case,  our  view  of  the  subject  is 
doubly  fortified.  Let  us  next  inquire  what  was  the 
mode  practised  by  the  apostles. 


19* 


CHAPTER  X. 

II.    THE    apostles'    MODE. 

The  apostolic  practice  in  respect  to  the  mode  of  baptism 
must  be  learned  from  their  Acts,  as  recorded  by  the  "be- 
loved physician,"  Luke.  The  more  closely  and  impar- 
tially we  examine  the  several  cases  related  in  the  Acts  of 
the  apostles,  the  more  fully  shall  we  be  convinced  that 
they  do  not  furnish  any  satisfactory  evidence  in  support 
of  submersion.     Let  us  commence  with — 

1.  The  baptism  of  the  three  thousand  converts  on  the 
day  of  pentecost'.  Acts  ii.  41,  "Then  they  that  gladly 
received  his  word  were  baptized,  and  the  same  day  there 
were  added  unto  them  about  three  thousand  souls.'''' 
The  mode  in  which  these  three  thousand  were  baptized 
is  not  specified,  and  we  are  left  to  find  it  out  by  the  ac- 
companying circumstances.  While  we  may  boldly  chal- 
lenge our  opponents  to  point  out  one  single  incident  in 
the  whole  history  of  the  case,  propitious  to  the  idea  of 
submersion,  we  can  adduce  strong  presumptive  evidence 
againt  it.  Submersion  in  the  case  under  consideration  is 
highly  improbable,  because  they  had  no  opportunity  for 
the  submersion  of  such  a  multitude.  Let  it  be  remem- 
bered that  the  apostles  and  their  hearers  were  collected 
together  at  one  place  in  Jerusalem,  probably  in  the  temple 
as  seems  to  be  intimated  in  v.  46,  and  as  this  Avas  the 
third  hour  of  the  day,  v.  15,  (9  o'clock  A.  M.)  which 
was  the  Jewish  hour  o{  morning  prayer,  it  is  most  prob- 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  223 

able  that  the  temple  was  the  place  in  which  they  were 
assembled.  Now  there  Avas  neither  at  the  temple,  nor  in 
any  other  part  of  Jerusalem,  a  suitable  place  for  submer- 
sion.' 

It  is  true,  the  pool  of  Bethesda  lay  but  a  little  to  the 
northeast  of  the  temple,  but  it  was  used  for  cleansing  the 
temple,  the  sacrifices.  Sic,  and  all  the  blood  and  offals 
and  filth  from  the  sacrifices  and  temple  were  washed  into 
it ;  which  some  suppose  imparted  to  the  water  its  healing 
virtue ;  but  whether  or  not,  it  was  unfit  for  baptizing. 
Besides,  it  contained  too  little  water  for  the  submersion 
of  so  many  in  so  short  a  time  as  was  occupied  (five 
hours,)  especially  at  that  season  of  the  year,  viz.  the 
month  of  May  or  later,  (the  time  when  pentecost  occur- 
red,) at  which  time,  John  informs  us,  no  rain  whatever 
fell ;-  and  its  porches  moreover,  Avere  occupied  by  the 
sick,  waiting  to  receive  the  benefit  of  its  healing  water. 
But  if  even  Bethesda  had  been  a  suitable  place  for  sub- 
mersion, the  use  of  it  could  not  have  been  obtained,  be- 
cause it  was  in  the  possession  of  the  priests,  the  avowed 
and  mortal  enemies  of  our  Lord  and  his  apostles.  And 
can  it  be  supposed  that  the  dignitaries  of  the  JeAvish 
church,  after  their  recent,  hard-earned  and  diabolical  tri- 
umph over  Christ  and  his  foUoAvers  ; — their  concerted  and 
undisguised  hostility  to  the  Christian  name ; — their  setded 
and  incurable  malice,  now  rankling  of  ancAV  on  account 
of  the  alarming  success  of  the  apostles  ; — can  it,  Ave  say, 
be  supposed  that  under  these  circumstances  they  would 
peaceably  surrender  their  claims  to  the  use  of  Bethesda, 
in  order  to  accommodate  the  apostles  of  Christ  Avith  a 

'The  Jews  commenced  their  day  at  6  o'clock  in  the  morning,  con- 
sequently their  third  hour  was  our  ninth. 
^Archseology,  p.  22. 


224  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

place  for  Christian  baptism  ;  particularly  as  the  time  for 
the  evening  sacrifice  came  on  between  three  and  four 
o'clock  P.  M.  (the  very  time  occupied  in  baptizing)  when 
the  use  of  the  pool  would  have  been  indispensable  ? 

The  brook  Kidron  or  Cedron,  is  still  less  likely  to 
have  afforded  the  necessary  convenience.  It  flowed 
along  the  e.ast  side  of  the  city,  was  at  best  but  a  turbid 
and  unimportant  stream,  and  always  dry  in  the  summer. 
Jahn  informs  us  ;  "  its  channel  is  dry  except  in  winter,"^ 
and  it  is  well  known  that  the  winter  is  over  in  that  coun- 
try towards  the  close  of  February ;  whereas  the  three 
thousand  were  baptized  in  May  or  the  beginning  of  June. 
Hence  there  could  have  been  no  submersion  there. 

The  only  remaining  water  that  might  be  supposed  to 
have  answered  the  purpose,  was  the  pool  of  Siloara,  or 
Shiloah,  which  flowed  at  the  bottom  of  Mount  Moriah  to 
the  southeast,  at  least  three-fourths  of  a  mile  from  where 
the  people  were  assembled.  Jerome,  an  ancient  com- 
mentator states  that  "  Siloam  does  not  flow  regularly, 
but  only  on  certain  days  and  hours,  when  it  bursts 
through  the  crevices  of  the  earth  and  from  rocky  caves."* 
But  we  have  no  account  of  the  apostles  marching  oflf  three 
thousand  persons,  that  distance,  with  all  the  multitude 
of  spectators  that  would  naturally  follow.  In  addition  to 
all  this,  (if  any  additional  remarks  be  necessary)  there  is 
reason  to  doubt  whether  Siloam  as  well  as  Bethesda,  was 
of  adequate  dimensions  to  admit  twelve  men,  (much  less 
the  additional  seventy  disciples)  for  the  purpose  of  sub- 
mersing three  thousand  converts. 

It  would  be  ridiculous  to  contend  that  the  apostles 
might  have  used  the  washing  lavers  in  the  temple,  for 
the  malignant  opposition  of  priests  and  the  deadly  hatred 

>Jahn,  §  19,  p.  20.  ^j^hn,  §  19,  p.  20. 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  225 

of  the  Jews  in  general  must  have  prevented  this.  Nor 
can  it  be  supposed  that  they  had  access  to  the  bathing 
places  in  private  houses ;  for  these  were  confined  to  the 
rich  and  honorable ;  few  of  whom,  as  yet,  were  in  any 
wise  disposed  to  befriend  the  cause  of  Christ.  Where 
then,  Ave  ask,  did  the  apostles  submerse  those  three  thou- 
sand converts?  They  might  conveniently  have  been 
baptized  by  aspersion,  but  ivhere  could  they  all  have  been 
submersed  by  twelve  apostles,  in  so  brief  a  space  of  time  ? 
Are  there  no  difficulties  attending  this  hypothesis  ? 

But  submersion  was  not  only  highly  improbable  but 
impossible,  because — 

They  had  not  time  for  it. 

Peter,  as  already  intimated,  commenced  his  sermon 
about  "the  third  hour  of  the  day,"  that  is  9  o'clock  A. 
M.  (v.  15.)  Judging  from  the  nature  of  the  occasion  and 
the  drift  of  his  sermon,  (of  which  we  have  but  a  mere 
epitome  reserved  on  record,)  he  could  not  have  preached 
less  than  an  hour.  His  hearers  were  excited  and  alarmed, 
and  anxiously  inquired,  "what  they  should  do,"  &c. ; 
then  the  apostles  entered  into  personal  conversation  with 
awakened  thousands,  and  gave  them  the  proper  direc- 
tions ;^  after  all  this  he  continued  for  some  time  instruct- 
ing and  exhorting  them,  for  it  is  expressly  said:  "And 
with  many  other  words  did  he  testify  and  exhort,"  (v. 
40.)  All  this  over,  the  converts  must  be  selected  from 
the  multitude,  and  examined  as  to  their  faith  and  experi- 
ence. If  they  were  submersed,  they  must  be  provided 
with  a  change  of  raiment,  because  Avhen  they  left  home, 
they  had  not  the  most  distant  idea  of  being  converted  and 
baptized,  and  were  therefore,  so  far  as  a  change  was  con- 

^Did  this  personal  conversation  with  awakened  sinners,  partake  of 
the  nature  of  what,  in  the  present  day,  is  termed  an  ^^  anxious  meti- 


226  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

cerned,  utterly  unprepared  for  the  ordinance ;  and  as  we 
dare  not  suppose  that  they  remained  on  the  ground,  or 
returned  to  their  lodgings  in  their  wet  clothes,  soaked  and 
dripping  from  head  to  foot,  considerable  delay  must  have 
been  occasioned  in  procuring  the  requisite  habiliments. 
Next,  apartments  for  the  men  and  women  must  be  ob- 
tained adjacent  to  the  place  of  baptism.  Before  all  these 
preliminaries  could  be  disposed  of  with  decency,  four 
hours  at  least,  if  not  longer,  must  have  elapsed  ;  which 
would  have  delayed  the  ceremony  until  1  o'clock.  The 
Jewish  day  closed  at  6  P.  M. ;  and  Luke  says  they  were 
baptized  and  added  to  the  church  that  "same  day."  Con- 
sequently they  had  but  five  hours  left  in  Avhich  to  per- 
form the  work  of  baptizing!  In  other  words,  twelve 
apostles  baptized  three  thousand  converts  in  three  hun* 
dred  minutes,  or  one  hundred  every  ten  minutes !  or  di- 
viding them  into  companies,  each  apostle  baptized  two 
hundi'ed  and  fifty  in  three  hundred  minutes,  which  would 
allow  one  minute  and  twelve  seconds  to  every  apostle  for 
each  baptism,  provided  they  all  continued  hard  at  work 
for  five  hours,  without  a  moment's  intermission!  We 
need  scarcely  stop  to  say  that  this  was  absolutely  impos- 
sible. It  usually  requires  at  least  five  or  six  minutes  in 
tlie  present  day  to  plunge  an  individual,  and  how  the 
same  thing  could  be  done  in  about  one  minute  in  the  days 
of  the  apostles,  and  that  too  for  five  continuous  hours  by 
the  same  individual,  is  more  than  we  can  tell.  Let  us 
suppose  that  every  one  of  the  two  luuidred  and  fifty  bap- 
tisms assigned  to  each  apostle,  required  six,  or  let  us  say 
only  foicr  minutes,  this  would  amount  to  one  thousand 
minutes,  or  sixteen  hours  and  four  minutes.  Now  they 
began  at  1  o'clock  P.  M.  or  probably  later ;  standing  con- 
stantly in  the  water  through  the  remainder  of  the  day  and 
the  subsequent  night,  by  the  time  that  sixteen  hours  and 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  227 

four  minutes  had  elapsed,  it  would  be  four  minutes  after 
5  o'clock  in  the  morning  of  the  next  day,  and  yet  we 
are  told  that  all  this  took  place  "the  same  day !"  Unless 
another  Joshua  was  there  to  command  the  sun  and  moon 
to  stand  still,  they  must,  surrounded  by  the  offended  and 
unbelieving  part  of  the  community,  have  been  plunging 
in  the  water,  in  all  the  darkness  and  confusion  of  the 
whole  night. 

In  this  calculation  we  have  made  many  concessions ; 
we  have  supposed  that  there  was  a  convenient  stream  of 
adequate  depth  and  expanse  to  admit  of  all  the  apostles 
being  engaged  at  the  same  time;  that  they  actually  all 
were  engaged  ;  that  all  the  converts  went  down  into  the 
water,  and  came  up  out  of  it,  though  we  read  nothing  of 
tliat ;  that  there  were  no  exhortations  immediately  prior 
to  the  act  of  baptism,  with  a  view  to  collect  the  thoughts 
and  compose  the  minds  of  the  candidates,  after  all  the 
hurry  and  confusion  of  preparation ;  that  no  agitation  and 
difference  of  opinion  took  place  among  such  a  multitude ; 
that  there  was  not  a  moment's  suspension  of  labor  during 
the  whole  time ;  that  all  the  apostles  held  out  until  the 
last,  and  that  the  strength  of  each  suhiced  to  plunge  his 
full  quota  under  the  water  during  the  few  hours  allotted 
him.'     All  this  and  much  more,  has  been  gratuitously 

'"  A  gentleman  of  veracity  told  the  writer  that  he  was  once  pre- 
sent when  forty-seven  were  dipped  in  one  day,  in  the  usual  way. 
The  first  operator  began,  and  went  through  the  ceremony,  until  he 
had  dipped  twenty-five  persons  ;  when  he  was  so  fatigued  that  he  was 
compelled  to  give  it  up  to  the  other,  who  with  great  apparent  diffi- 
culty dipped  the  other  ticenty-two.  Both  appeared  completely  ex- 
hausted, and  went  off  the  ground,  into  a  house  hard  by,  to  change 
tlieir  clothes  and  refresh  themselves."  Scripture  Directory  for  Bap- 
tism by  a  Layman,  14. 

We  have  just  seen  an  article  in  the  "  Philadelphia  J^orth  ^meri- 
«an,"  containing  an  account  of  the  recent  revival  in  Cincinnati,  in 


228  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

admittecl,  and  yet,  after  all  these  admissions,  the  whole 
matter  still  remains  utterly  incredible. 

We  know  it  has  been  said  that  the  seventy  disciples 
aided  on  this  occasion ;  but  what  foundation  have  we  for 
this  assertion?  none  at  all;  the  proof  is  all  against  it. 
Where  is  even  the  evidence  that  they  had  authority  at 
that  time  to  baptize  ?  It  is  not  found  in  Luke  x.  where 
we  are  furnished  with  an  account  of  their  call  and  com- 
mission. The  privilege  to  baptize  was  one  of  those  im- 
portant functions,  originally  invested  in  the  apostles  only. 
It  was  at  first  distinctively  an  apostolic  prerogative,  sub- 
sequently they  transmitted  this  power  to  others  whom 
they  judged  men  of  established  reputation  for  integrity, 
piety,  understanding,  who  felt  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
to  take  the  office  of  the  ministry.  "  Lay  hands  hastily 
on  no  man,"  was  an  apostolic  maxim  in  reference  to 
priestly  ordination.  1  Tim.  v.  22.  But  we  have  no  ac- 
count of  the  apostles  having  ordained  any  person  to  the 
work  of  the  ministry  during  the  ten  days  that  intervened 
between  their  commission  and  the  day  of  pentecost.  We 
do  know,  however,  that  our  Saviour  himself  commanded 
them  to  suspend  the  exercise  of  all  their  apostolic  func- 
tions until  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  took 
place  on  pentecost.     Luke  xxiv.  49.     Acts.  i.  7,  8. 

Who,  after  the  foregoing  investigation,  can  maintain 
that  the  case  before  us  furnishes  any  authority  for  sub- 
mersion ?  It  appears  to  us  that  such  a  thought  could  never 
enter  the  mind  of  a  reader,  not  already  committed  on  the 
side  of  plunging:  and  it  surely  is  high  time  to  abandon 

which  we  find  the  following  remarlis:  "A  gentleman  informs  us  he 
saw  eighty-five  adults  receive  at  one  time  the  ordinance  of  baptism, 
when  the  officiating  clergyman  was  obliged  to  desist  through  ex- 
haustion, although  a  large  number  of  other  candidates  were  in  at- 
tendance." 


MODE   OF   BAPTISM.  229 

an  interpretation,  at  once  so  unreasonable  and  untenable. 
Let  us  suppose  that  the  apostles,  agreeably  to  a  well 
known  custom  among  the  Jews,  took  bunches  of  hyssop 
and  sprinkled  the  multitude,  and  all  the  difficulty  will  at 
once  vanish.  "This,"  says  a  judicious  writer,  "could 
have  been  done  in  a  very  short  time,  if  they  passed 
through  the  multitude,  and  the  rest  of  the  day  have  been 
spent  in  instruction,  in  preaching  and  in  prayer,  much  bet- 
ter than  in  needlessly  phmging  men  and  women  in  water, 
to  the  detriment  of  their  health,  the  offence  of  the  modest, 
and  the  dishonor  of  the  Christian  church.  Is  it  not 
strange,  if  the  apostles  did  here  immerse,  that  we  do  not 
read  of  any  circumstance  which  would  even  in  the  faint- 
est manner  favor  the  supposition  ?  Did  the  apostles  con- 
ceal the  proper  mode,  and  was  it  left  for  the  sectarian  at 
this  late  day,  to  enlighten  the  church?" 


20 


CHAPTER  XL 

2.  The  next  case  of  apostolic  baptism  that  demands 
attention,  is  that  respecting  the  Ethiopian  eunuch,  Acts 
viii.  38;  "They  went  down  both  into  the  water,  both 
Philip  and  the  eunuch ;  and  he  baptized  him,  and  when 
they  were  come  up  out  of  the  water,"  &;c.  As  this  case 
has  already  been  examined  at  large,  (see  p.  201,  sqq.) 
we  shall  now  finally  dispose  of  it  in  a  few  words.  It 
has  been  conclusively  proved,  and  every  one  acquainted 
with  the  Greek  language  knows,  that  the  passage  may 
with  equal,  and  as  we  think,  greater  correctness,  be  ren- 
dered :  "  they  descended  to  the  water,  and  ascended 
from  it ;"  and  such  a  translation  would  at  once  strip  the 
case  of  every  circumstance  countenancing  the  idea  of 
submersion.  But  independently  of  this,  and  on  the  sup- 
position that  the  common  vei'sion  be  correct,  the  mere  fact 
of  going  into  the  water  is  no  proof  of  submersion  ;  if  it 
were,  we  should  have  to  believe  that  Philip  was  plunged 
at  the  same  time,  as  he  also  went  into  it.  The  argument 
then,  apparently  in  favor  of  submersion,  derived  from  the 
case  of  the  eunuch,  as  well  as  from  the  baptism  of  Christ, 
is  founded  altogether  on  the  mere  sound  of  the  words, 
and  vanishes  on  the  slightest  investigation. 

But  as  there  is  nothing  in  this  case  to  favor  submersion, 
let  us  inquire  whether  it  presents  any  evidence  for  asper- 
sion. Philip  met  the  eunuch,  v.  26,  in  a  road  that  led 
through  the  desert,  as  the  text  itself  tells  us,  implying 


MODE    OF   BAPTISM.  231 

that  no  streams  could  be  found  there,  if  we  consult  the 
geography  of  the  country,  we  will  find  that  no  river,  not 
even  a  creek,  runs  through  that  region.  Philip  explained 
tlie  52d  and  53d  chapters  of  Isaiah,  which  are  here  ex- 
pressly mentioned.  He  found  these  words  in  the  pro- 
phecy :  "So  shall  he  sprinkle  many  nations,"  lii.  15 
Philip,  of  course,  must  have  told  the  eunuch  that  the 
blood  of  Christ  was  shed  to  wash  us  clean  from  sin,  for 
this  is  the  leading  idea  of  the  prophecy  on  which  the 
eunuch  was  meditating.  He  must  likewise  have  spoken 
of  professing  his  faith  in  Christ,  of  becoming  a  member 
of  his  church  and  announcing  and  sealing  the  fact  by  bap- 
tism, for  it  was  always  expected  of  the  Jewish  and  gen- 
tile converts  that  they  should  make  a  profession  of  faith 
preparatory  to  submitting  to  this  ordinance,  and  hence 
we  can  understand  how  the  eunuch  could  mention  bap- 
tism. Philip  may  have  told  him  that  as  water  cleanses 
the  body,  so  the  blood  of  Christ  effects  a  spiritual  cleans- 
ing ; — that  hence,  baptism  was  fidl  of  meaning, — that  it 
was  a  sprinkling, — noting  too  the  word  "  sprinkle"  in  the 
prophecy.  The  eunuch  Avas  convinced, and  coming  "unto 
a  certain  water,  (perhaps  a  small  spring  gushed  forth,  as 
is  sometimes  the  case  in  a  desert,')  he  was  baptized,  and 

'The  place  where  this  eunuch  was  baptized,  Beza,  by  a  very  wide 
mistake,  makes  to  be  the  river  Eleutherus,  which  ran  near  the  foot 
of  Mount  Lebanon,  in  the  most  northern  borders  of  Palestine,  quite  at 
tiie  other  end  of  the  country  ;  Brochard  places  it  near  Nehel  Escol, 
or  the  Torrent  of  the  Grape,  the  place  whence  the  spies  fetched  the 
bunch  of  grapes  ;  on  the  left  side  of  which  valley,  about  half  a 
leagTie,  runs  a  brook,  not  far  from  Sicelech,  in  which  this  eunuch 
was  baptized.  But  Eusebius  and  St.  Hierom  (followed  herein  by 
Ado,  the  martyrologist)  more  probably  place  it  near  Beth-soran, 
(where  we  are  told  it  is  still  to  be  seen  at  this  day,)  a  village  twenty 
miles  distant  from  Jerusalem  in  the  way  between  it  and  Hebron, 


232  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

in  all  probability,  by  sprinkling.  Most  unquestionably 
this  is  a  more  natural  representation  than  the  forced  inter- 
pretation which  involves  submersion. 

near  to  which  there  was  a  spring  bubbling  up  at  the  foot  of  a  hill, 
St.  Hierom  adds,  that  it  was  again  swallowed  up  in  the  same  ground 
that  produced  it,  and  that  here  it  was  that  Philip  baptized  the  Ethio- 
pian.    See  Dr.  Cave's  "  Apostolici,"  life  of  St.  Philip,  vol.  ii.'p.  113. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

The  case  of  Lydia  and  her  household,  Acts  xvi.  13 — 
15,  furnishes  no  proof  whatever  in  favor  of  submersion. 
She  may  possibly  have  been  baptized  by  "  a  river-side," 
but  nothing  can  be  inferred  from  this  in  favor  of  plung- 
ing, since  we  are  told  that  she  was  at  that  place,  not  for 
ihe  purpose  of  being  baptized,  but  because  "prayer  was 
wont  to  be  made  there."  It  is  even  not  certain  that  she 
was  baptized  at  the  prayer-meeting ;  and  the  exclusion  of 
strangers,  &c.  rather  countenances  the  supposition  that 
she  returned  to  her  residence,  and  there  in  a  retired  and 
silent  apartment,  she  and  her  children  were  baptized  in 
the  usual  way. 

The  fourth  instance  that  we  notice,  is  the  baptism  of 
Cornelius  and  his  friends.  Acts  x.  41 — 8.  The  Holy 
Ghost  having  been  poured  out  upon  them,  Peter  deter- 
mines to  administer  baptism.  But  observe,  he  makes  no 
proposition  to  leave  the  spot — no  preparations  are  made 
for  submersion  ;  but  he  modestly  inquires,  "  can  any 
man  forbid  water  that  these  should  not  be  baptized  which 
have  received  the  Holy  Ghost  as  well  as  we  ?"  Acts  x. 
47  ;  i.  e.,  in  plain  English  etiquette, — "  Will  some  one 
present  be  kind  enough  to  fetch  some  water,  that  these 
may  be  baptized  ?"  The  language  of  Peter  deserves  a 
little  farther  notice.  The  verb  iia>\iia>,  forbid,  implies,  in 
:this  connection,  as  in  other  places,  the  power  (sometimes 
20* 


234  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

including  the  right)  of  imposing  a  prohibition  on  the 
thing  or  act  specified.  Thus,  Num.  xi.  28,  "  Joshua 
said,  my  lord,  Moses,  forbid  them,"  (i.  e.  Eldad  and  Me- 
dad  from  prophesying). 

Mark  ix.  39.     But  Jesus  said  forbid  him  not. 

Mark  x.  14.  Suffer  litde  children  and  forbid  them 
not  to  come  unto  me. 

Luke  vi.  29.  He  that  taketh  thy  cloak  forbid  not  to 
take  thy  coat  also. 

Nothing  is  more  obvious  than  that  the  prohibitive 
phrase  in  these  passages,  fully  recognizes  the  power  of 
granting  or  withholding  at  option;  and  this  power  is 
also  clearly  recognized  in  the  persons  to  whom  Peter's 
address  was  made.  Had  they  possessed  no  such  power 
as  the  one  in  question,  the  appeal  of  Peter  on  this  occa- 
sion, would  have  been  trifling  and  senseless.  For  in- 
stance, if  it  had  been  the  intention  of  Peter  to  repair  to  a 
public  pool,  a  pond,  or  a  river,  in  order  to  submerse  the 
candidates,  it  is  manifest  that  the  persons  present  would 
have  had  no  power  of  interference  to  prohibit  such  an 
act.  And  in  such  a  case  it  would  have  been  senseless  to 
inquire :  *'  Can  any  man  present  prohibit  the  use  of  a 
public  water  that  these  should  not  be  baptized  ?"  &c. 
But  if  the  apostle  intended  to  baptize  the  gentile  con- 
verts on  the  spot,  and  by  aspersion,  and  consequently 
needed  only  a  vessel  of  water  to  be  brought  in — a  ser- 
vice which  it  was  certainly  in  the  power  of  any  one  pre- 
sent to  grant  or  withhold — it  was  with  the  greatest  pro- 
priety of  language — which  at  the  same  moment  evinced 
true  delicacy  of  sentiment,  combined  with  the  most  dis- 
ciplined courtesy — that  he  couched  his  request  for  a  ves- 
sel of  water  in  that  interrogatory  appeal — "  Can  any 
man  forbid  water  that  these  should  not  be  baptized  which 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  235 

have  received  the  Holy  Ghost  as  well  as  we?"  It  seems 
water  was  immediately  brought  into  the  house  at  Peter's 
request;  that  no  interruption  occurred,  and  that  they 
were  baptized  on  the  spot.  This  case  then,  especially 
if  considered  in  connection  with  a  right  understanding  of 
Peter's  question,  presents  a  singular  difficulty  in  the  the- 
ory of  exclusive  submersion,  and  appears  to  us  to  be 
irreconcilable  with  it. 

Dr.  Wood's  comment  on  this  case  corresponds  with 
the  above  ;  "  Peter  said  :  '  Can  any  man  forbid  water 
that  these  should  not  be  baptized  ?'  It  is  most  natural  to 
understand  this  to  mean,  can  any  man  forbid  water  to 
be  brought?  It  is  far  less  natural  to  understand  it  to 
mean,  can  any  man  forbid  us  to  go  out  to  a  river  or 
fountain  of  water  ?  It  seems  impossible  that  this  ac- 
count should  be  thought  by  any  one  to  favor  the  mode  of 
baptizing  by  immersion." 

The  fifth  example  that  we  shall  notice,  is  that  of  Saul 
of  Tarsus.  Acts  ix.  18  and  xxii.  16.  In  this  and  in 
the  succeeding  cases  we  shall  adopt  the  comments  of  a 
judicious  writer  on  this  subject.  "  Here  we  must  re- 
member that  Paul  had  not  eaten  any  thing  for  three  days, 
verse  9.  Nothing  is  said  of  his  having  left  the  house, 
in  the  weak  state  occasioned  by  a  long  and  rigid  fast,  and 
of  being  plunged  in  water.  But  we  find  the  contrary. 
'  He  arose  and  was  baptized.'  We  look  at  the  Greek 
word,  and  find  it  to  be  composed  of  two  others,  avacrT*?, 
which  mean  '  standing  or  rising  up,'  so  that  we  read,  lit- 
erally, '  he,  standing  up,  was  baptized.'  Nothing  is 
here  said  of  his  being  buried  in  a  loatery  grave — simply 
that  he  stood  up,  in  the  house,  had  water  poured  on  his 
head,  and  was  thus  baptized  ; — these  are  obvious  circum- 
stances.    If  it  be  more  becoming  to  take  the  Bible  as  it 


1236  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

stands,  rather  than  attempt  to  improve  the  narrative  of 
the  sacred  vi^riter,  then  why  must  we  insert  so  manv  cir- 
cumstances, as  that  Paul  went  out  of  the  house,  sought  a 
stream,  &c.,  when  the  simple  account  before  us  leads  to 
a  supposition  the  very  reverse  ? 

"  We  have  now  arrived  at  the  sixth  case  of  baptism, 
mentioned  in  the  Acts,  which  is  that  of  the  Philippian 
jailor  and  his  household.  Acts  xvi.  32 — 33.  All  the  cir- 
cumstances detailed  in  the  preceding  verses  plainly  show 
that  immersion,  under  the  existing  circumstances,  was 
totally  out  of  question.  Paul  and  Silas  had  been  thrust, 
verse  24,  into  the  '  inner  prison.'  Suddenly  came  the 
earthquake,  at  midnight.  The  jailor  hastened  out  in 
alarm,  was  convinced  that  God  was  the  protector  of  Paul 
and  Silas,  was  awakened,  conversed  briefly  with  Paul, 
and  was  '  straightway'  baptized,  that  is,  '  in  the  same 
hour  of  the  night,  verse  33.  Now  as  the  jailor  at  the 
same  time  brought  in  water  and  '  washed  their  stripes' 
or  wounds,  is  it  not  clear,  that  a  part  of  this  water,  in  a 
vessel,  may  have  aswered  for  the  baptism  1  We  read 
nothing  of  the  circumstance  that  at  midnight,  the  whole 
family  with  Paul  went  out  of  the  jail  in  search  of  a  riv- 
er, &c., — nothing  that  would  imply  such  a  circumstance. 
We  ask,  would  it  have  been  in  character  with  the  noble, 
upright  Paul,  to  steal  out  of  the  jail  at  midnight  in  a 
clandestine  manner,  in  order  to  dip  the  jailor,  and  then 
the  next  morning  to  refuse  to  leave  his  prison  walls,  till 
the  magistrates  who  had  confined  him,  would  personally 
dismiss  him  in  an  honorable  manner  ?  verse  37.  Would 
such  insincerity  have  been  calculated  to  give  the  jailor  a 
favorable  opinion  of  the  integrity  anl  honest/  of  Paul? 
Suppose  such  a  scene  had  occurred  to  an  ramersionist 
^preacher — suppose  that  he  had  thought  it  advisable  to 


MODE   OF   BAPTISM.  237 

risk  the  danger  of  leaving  the  jail  at  midnight,  wlien 
guards  surrounded  the  building,  had  gone  some  distance, 
and  dipped  the  convert ;  would  he  or  his  friends  describe 
the  scene  in  a  way  that  would  lead  us  to  think  he  had 
only  sprinkled  or  poured  water  on  the  head  of  the  con- 
vert ?  Is  there  a  single  circumstance  in  the  whole  nar- 
rative  that  is  favorable  to  the  idea  of  immersion  ?  Among 
the  wretched  accommodations  of  a  Roman  jail,  can  we 
find  large  ponds,  or  convenient  batliing  vessels  ?  The 
whole  account  leads  us  to  conclude  at  once,  that  the 
jailor  was  baptized  in  the  only  mode  which  we  have 
hitherto  been  able  to  discover,  that  is,  by  pouring  or 
sprinkling. 

But  as  if  to  remove  all  difficulties,  and  silence  all  con- 
troversy, resort  is  had  to  the  old  and  convenient  hypothe- 
sis—an hypothesis  which  has  peculiarly  befriended  our 
opponents  on  other  occasions  of  need,  viz.  that  there 
was,  in  all  probability,  a  private  hath  in  the  jail  which 
served  them  on  this  occasion  for  a  place  to  immerse.  It 
is  unfortunate,  however,  for  this  hypothesis  that  Phillippi 
lay  under  latitude  41°  north— in  a  climate  where  baths 
are  little  used— and  that  the  person  supposed  to  have  fur- 
nished the  bath  on  this  occasion,  was  a  jailor  and  not  in 
possession  of  the  luxuries  of  wealth. 

7.  The  next  instance  is  thatof  Paul  baptizing  at  Corinth. 
Acts  xviii.  7—8.  None  of  the  circumstances  mentioned, 
imply  the  mode  of  baptism,  unless  that  from  the  circum- 
stances that  Justus  lived  near  the  synagogue,  v.  7,  that 
Crispus  the  _ chief  ruler  of  the  synagogue  believed,  and 
that  many  Corinthians  were  baptized,  we  are  to  infer, 
that  they  assembled  at  the  house  of  Justus,  and  were 
there  baptized  in  the  usual  way. 


238  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

8.  We  have  now  reached  the  last  case.  It  is  that  of 
Paul  baptizing  at  Ephesus.  Acts  xix.  1 — 5.  Here  too, 
nothing  special  is  mentioned  to  indicate  the  mode  ;  Paul 
explained  the  nature  of  Christian  baptism  to  the  individ- 
uals mentioned,  and  as  he  was  satified  with  their  spirit- 
ual state,  they  were  baptized  at  once.  Where  were  they 
at  the  time  ?  Near  a  pond  or  creek  ?  If  so,  how  singu- 
lar it  is,  that  converts  in  this  and  other  cases,  could  not 
be  found,  unless,  by  a  remarkable  coincidence,  a  large 
body  of  water  Avas  near.  If  we  are  to  believe  a  class  of 
men  in  the  west,  it  must  be  that  there  is  some  special 
virtue  in  water,  which  we  have  never  discovered — for 
they  tell  us  that  dipping  in  water  is  essentially  con- 
nected with  regeneration.  If  all  the  ponds  and  creeks 
which  exist  in  the  imaginations  of  immersionists  who 
interpret  the  Acts,  had  really  watered  Judea,  then  it  may 
be  proved  by  a  calculation  that  there  would  have  been 
enough  water  to  have  turned  the  whole  land  into  a  sea.^ 

We  have  now  noticed  all  the  examples  of  apostolic 
baptism  recorded  in  the  New  Testament,  from  Avhich  it 
is  possible  to  learn  any  thing  respecting  the  mode;  and 
after  a  careful  examination,  we  are  confirmed  in  our  ori- 
ginal opinion,  that  the  circumstances  attending  those 
examples,  are  by  no  means  favorable  to  the  practice  of 
submersion,  but  the  very  reverse. 

'Essays,  Lutheran  Observer,  vol.  iii.  No.  19,  20. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

Let  it  be  remembered  that  our  main  object  thus  far  has 
not  been  to  establish  the  doctrine  of  affusion,  but  simply 
to  show  that  submersion  was  not  in  vogue  among  the 
primitive  Christians.  If  this  fact  be  established,  there  is 
no  necessity  to  adduce  arguments  in  support  of  our  mode, 
for  that  will  then  follow  as  *a  necessary  consequence. 

We  have  plainly  seen  that  there  is  nothing  to  be  found, 
either  in  the  literal  terms  used  in  reference  to  baptism. 
viz.  fi^Trri^o)  and  its  derivatives,  and  the  prepositions 
ua;Di,  IX,  <fcc.,  nor  in  the  circumstances  accompanying  its 
early  administration,  which  sustains  the  idea  of  plunging ; 
but  that,  on  the  other  hand,  those  terms  and  circumstances 
greatly  favor  the  mode  by  affusion,  so  much  so  indeed,  as 
to  amount  to  demonstrative  proof.  There  remains  how- 
ever one  other  source  of  argument  on  this  topic,  and  that 
is  the  metaphoric  or  figuarative  language  applied  in 
the  New  Testament  to  baptism,  which  we  shall  now 
proceed  to  examine. 

TUE    FIGURATIVE    LANGUAGE    OF    THE    NEW    TESTAMENT 
IN   REFERENCE    TO  BAPTISM. 

1.  "Know  ye  not,  that  so  many  of  us  as  were  baptized 
unto  Jesus  Christ  were  baptized  into  his  death  ?  There- 
fore we  are  buried  with  him  by  baptism  into  death :  that 
like  as  Christ  was  raised  up  from  the  dead  by  the  glory 
of  the  Father,  even  so  we  also  should  walk  in  newness  of 
life.     For  if  we  have  been  planted,"  &c. 


240  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

Our  Baptist  brethren  take  for  granted  that  there  is  in 
this  passage  an  obvious  allusion  to  the  mode  of  baptism  ; 
that  it  refers  to  a  resemblance  between  the  interment  of  a 
dead  body  and  the  immersion  of  a  baptized  person  entirely 
under  the  water ;  and  also  to  the  resemblance  between 
the  subsequent  resurrection  of  that  dead  body  from  be- 
neath the  surface  of  the  earth  and  the  raising  of  the  bap- 
tized person  up  again  from  beneath  the  surface  of  the 
fluid.  In  other  words,  they  assert  that  baptism  repre- 
sents the  burial  and  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  as 
none  can  be  said  to  be  buried  unless  put  under  ground, 
so  no  one  is  baptized  unless  plunged  under  water.  This 
we  believe  is  their  usual  interpretation,  and  we  have  ex- 
pressed it  in  as  strong  and  lucid  language  as  Ave  could 
command. 

That  some  Pedobaptists  also  have  partly  adopted  this 
exposition,  is  well  known  to  us,  but  we  are  notwithstand- 
ing clearly  of  opinion  that  it  is  entirely  erroneous. 

There  can  be  no  allusion  here  to  the  mode  of  baptism, 
because — 

[a)  The  passage  manifestly  presents  a  ^Imn  antithesis  ; 
the  first  part  of  which  is,  "  we  are  buried  with  him," 
(like  him,  or  in  like  manner  with  him),  the  second  part 
is,  "  even  so  we  also  should  walk  in  newness  of  life." 
This  resurrection  to  newness  of  life  is  evidently  spiritual, 
for  it  is  one  which  Christians  in  the  present  life,  have 
confessedly  already  actually  experienced,  consequently 
the  being  "buried  with  Christ"  must  also  be  spiritual. 
To  understand  it  then,  as  of  a  literal  burial  under  water, 
is  to  understand  it  in  a  manner  which  the  laws  of  exegesis 
absolutely  forbid.  But  what  resemblance  is  there  between 
being  spiritually  buried  into  death,  that  is,  buried  and 
dead  unto  sin,  the  world,  &c.,  and  a  gross  literal  plunging 
under  water  ? 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  241 

(b)  There  is  not  another  passage  in  the  whole  Bible 
in  which  baptism,  or  being  bathed  or  washed  in  ivater  is 
employed  as  the  symbol  of  deatli  or  burial  in  the  grave. 
In  the  Jewish  ceremonies,  it  is  always  an  emblem  of  pu- 
rification, never  of  death  or  interment.  Nor  can  we 
think  that  the  apostle,  in  the  passage  before  us,  can  be 
justly  charged  with  so  glaring  a  departure  from  propriety, 
as  to  adopt  a  comparison  in  which  it  is  impossible  to  trace 
one  single  point  of  coincidence. 

(c)  Instead  of  any  resemblance  between  baptism  and 
death  or  burial,  there  is,  in  their  very  nature,  a  diametri- 
cal opposition.  Baptism,  as  just  remarked,  is  an  emblem 
of  moral  purity  ;  it  signifies  our  being  cleansed  from  sin 
and  renovated  by  the  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  But 
how  does  this  comport  Avith  the  place  of  dead  men's 
bones  and  all  uncleanness, — with  physical  decomposition, 
natural  corruption,  putrefaction,  loathsomeness  and  de- 
struction ? 

(d)  If  there  even  were  a  similarity  between  submer- 
sion and  the  ordinary  literal  burying  of  a  dead  body  ;  or, 
in  other  words,  if  suddenly  plunging  a  body  under  water 
resembled  the  lowering  of  a  corpse  into  a  hole  dug  in  the 
earth  and  covering  it  gradually  with  ground  ;  still  that 
resemblance  would  not  hold  good  in  relation  to  Christ's 
interment,  to  which  the  passage  obviously  alludes.  The 
body  of  Christ  Avas  not  buried  after  the  manner  of  the 
present  day.  It  was  placed  in  a  tomb  hewn  out  of  a 
rock ;  not  a  tomb  sunk  in  the  earth,  but  hollowed  out  of 
a  rock,  above  ground,  and  containing  separate  cells  or 
niches  for  the  reception  of  bodies,  "  Even  supposing 
then,  that  it  were  yielded  to  our  Baptist  brethren  that 
the  design  of  the  apostle  is  to  teach  the  'mode  of  baptism, 
by  comparing  it  to  the  burial  of  Christ,  it  would  by  no 

21 


242  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

means  serve  their  purpose.  There  was  not  in  fact  any 
such  subterranean  immersion,  if  the  expression  may  be 
allowed,  as  they  imagine.  The  body  of  the  Saviour  was 
evidently  laid  in  a  stone  cell,  above  ground,  in  Avhich  no 
earth  came  in  contact  with  it,  and  in  which,  when  the 
stone  which  closed  up  the  door  was  taken  away,  the 
body  was  distinctly  visible.  In  short,  the  burial  of  Christ 
no  more  resembled  the  modern  interment  of  a  dead  boay 
among  us,  than  the  depositing  such  a  body,  for  a  time, 
in  an  apartment  in  the  basement  story  of  a  dwelling 
house,  the  floor  of  which  was  either  not  sunk  below  the 
surface  of  the  earth  at  all,  or  if  any,  not  more  than  a  few 
inches  ;  admitting  of  free  ingress  and  egress  as  a  common 
inhabited  room.  The  figure  in  question,  then,  does  not 
serve  the  turn  of  our  Baptist  brethren. 

(c)  To  maintain  that  in  the  passage  under  considera- 
tion, the  mode  of  baptism  is  exhibited  by  a  literal  bury- 
ing of  a  dead  body,  proves  too  much,  and  therefore  en- 
tirely fails.  In  the  very  next  verse,  (v.  5.)  the  apostle 
says :  "  We  have  been  planted  together,"  (by  baptism) 
"in  the  likeness  of  his  death;"  now  what  resemblance 
is  tliere  between,  not  the  planting  of  a  literal  seed  in  the 
ground,  for  there  is  no  such  allusion  here,  but  our  being 
"planted  with  Christ,"  and  submersion?  our  planting 
with  Christ,  is  a  spiritual  one,  as  the  grafting  of  a  branch 
upon  a  tree,  but  is  this  like  plunging  under  the  water  ? 
Further,  in  the  succeeding  verse  (v.  6.)  the  apostle  speaks 
of  our  being  ^'^  crucified  \v\i\\  Christ,"  and  that  also  by 
baptism ;  are  not  our  Baptist  brethren  then  bound  to  show 
us,  how  plunging  under  the  water  resembles  the  nailing 
of  a  body  to  a  cross  ?  Evidently  they  make  this  passage 
prove  too  much  for  their  purpose,  and  therefore  wrest  it 
to  the  prejudice  of  their  own  cause. 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  243 

(f)  If  the  text  had  any  reference  to  the  mode  of  bap- 
tism, it  would  rather  favor  pouring  or  sprinkling.  The 
modern  manner  of  interring  the  dead,  is,  not  to  thrust 
the  coffin  into  the  earth,  but  to  lower  it  slowly  and 
solemnly  into  the  grave,  and  then  to  sprinkle  the  earth 
over  it;  and  this  sprinkling  or  gradual  filling  up  of  the 
grave,  is  more  like  pouring  in  than  plunging  in.  But 
such  an  interpretation  like  that  of  the  Baptist's  is  per- 
fectly frivolous,  inasmuch  as  there  is  no  allusion  what- 
ever to  the  mode  of  baptism. 

(g)  Christ  lay  in  the  tomb  until  the  third  day  ;  why 
then  should  not  the  person  baptized  remain  under  the 
water  until  the  third  day?  Paul  speaks  in  the  present 
tense,  "  we  are,"  not,  we  have  been,  or  shall  be,  but 
"  we  are  buried  with  him,"  as  if  they  had  not  yet 
emerged  from  "the  watery  grave."  Of  course  then,  if 
the  mode  of  baptism  is  here  exhibited,  our  Baptist  friends 
are  bound  to  keep  their  converts  three  days  under  the 
water. 

(Ji)  If  we  understand  the  phrase,  "buried  with  Christ 
in  baptism,"  literally,  we  are  bound  to  give  a  like  inter- 
pretation to  parallel  passages,  and  this  would  lead  to  the 
grossest  absurdities.  For  instance.  Gal.  iii.  27.  "  As 
many  of  you  as  have  been  baptized  into  Christ,  \\2.\e  put 
on  Christ."  Here  the  metaphor  is  taken  from  the  put- 
ting on  of  clothes.  Accordingly,  a  literal  interpretation 
would  require  that  at  our  baptism,  we  must  put  off  and 
on  our  apparel ;  and  this  construction  was  actually  given 
to  the  passage  by  the  ancient  Baptists.  They  read  of 
"being  buried  by  baptism,"  and  understanding  \i  liter- 
ally, they  commenced  plunging;  they  also  read  of  "put- 
ting on  Christ"  in  baptism,  and  other  similar  passages, 
and  by  the  same  rule  of  interpretation,  were  compelled 


244  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

to  baptize  naked !  Is  this  a  mere  fiction  ? — a  slander  ? 
God  forbid  that  we  should  bring  a  false  accusation  against 
our  brethren,  even  for  the  sake  of  overthrowing  an  un- 
scriptural  practice ! — if  we  are  in  error,  let  it  be  proved. 
But  the  disgusting  fact  is  too  well  authenticated  to  admit 
of  a  doubt.  Now,  can  a  principle  of  exegesis  which  con- 
ducts to  such  absurd  results,  be  correct? — "judge  ye." 

We  might  lengthen  this  list  of  objections  to  the  Bap- 
tist exposition  of  this  text,  but  we  forbear;  the  difficult- 
ies are  already  sufficiently  accumulated.  We  accord- 
ingly feel  compelled  to  dissent  from  it,  and  to  believe 
that  the  apostle  had  only  a  spiritual  or  moral  burying  in 
view.  What  else  but  a  spiritual  burying  can  be  meant, 
when  he  says,  "  we  are  buried  with  him  by  baptism  into 
his  death?^'  Is  this  physical  ha'piism,  or  moral?  Is  it 
not  plain,  that  reference  is  here  made  to  baptism,  only 
because,  when  the  ordinance  was  administered,  the  Chris- 
tian promised  to  renounce  sin  and  to  mortify  all  his  evil 
desires,  and  thus  "  to  die  unto  sin,  that  he  might  live 
unto  God?"  We  must  believe,  therefore,  that  there  is 
no  more  reference  to  the  mode  of  baptism  here,  than  to 
the  mode  of  the  resurrection.  The  one  may  just  as  well 
be  supposed  as  the  other. 

In  this  view  we  are  strengthened  by  the  opinions 
of  many  enlightened  writers  of  various  denominations, 
among  whom  are  even  some  of  the  Baptist  church.  Mr. 
Robinson,  the  Baptist  historian,  and  Mr.  Judson,  the 
Baptist  missionary,  who  both  strenuously  maintained  the 
necessity  of  submersion,  "  admit  that  this  passage  is 
m,isapplied,  when  used  as  evidence  of  the  mode  of  bap- 
tism.''''^ Here  we  have  two  eminent  men,  decided 
advocates  of  plunging,  coinciding  in  the  declaration  that 

'Hamilton  in  his  work  on  the  subject,  p.  95, 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  245 

this  passage  affords  no  proof  in  favor  of  their  mode  of 
baptism. 

What  then  is  the  true  import  of  this  text  ? — "  The 
apostle  in  the  preceding  part  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Ro- 
mans, had  shown  that  Christians  are  justified  by  faith  in 
the  righteousness  of  Christ.  He  proceeds  in  the  sixth 
chapter  to  obviate  the  objection,  that  this  doctrine  tends 
to  licentiousness.  "  What  shall  we  say,  then  ?  Shall 
we  continue  in  sin  that  grace  may  abound?  God  forbid!" 
He  rejects  with  abhorrence  the  odious  thought.  "  How 
shall  we  that  are  dead  to  sin  live  any  longer  therein?" 
He  then  adverts  to  the  significance  of  baptism,  which 
being  the  ordinance  which  seals  our  introduction  into  the 
family  of  Christ  may  be  considered  as  exhibiting  both 
the  first  principles  of  gospel  truth  and  the  first  elements 
of  Christian  character.  "  Know  ye  not,  that  so  many 
of  us  as  were  baptized  into  Jesus  Christ,  were  baptized 
into  his  death?"  He  then  infers,  that  since  baptism  has 
so  immediate  a  reference  to  the  death  of  Christ,  it  must, 
by  consequence,  be  connected  also  with  his  resurrection ; 
and  that,  as  in  the  former  view,  it  teaches  the  regene- 
rated the  abandoning  of  the  old  life  of  sin ;  so,  in  the  lat- 
ter, it  equally  teaches  them  the  pursuit  and  progress  of 
tine  new  life  of  righteousness.  "Therefore  we  are  buried 
with  him  by  baptism  into  death  ;  that  like  as  Christ  was 
raised  up  from  the  dead  by  the  glory  of  the  Father,  even 
so  we  also  should  walk  in  newness  of  life." 

The  obvious  design  of  the  apostle  is  to  illustrate  the 
character  and  obligations  of  believers,  from  the  circum- 
stance, that  they  are,  in  a  certain  respect,  conformed  to 
Christ's  death  ;  that  as  he  died/or  sin,  so  they  are  dead, 
or  are  under  obligations  to  be  dead,  to  sin ;  that  is  they 
are  holy,  or  are,  by  their  profession,  obliged  to  be  holy. 
21* 


346  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

"  So  many  of  us  as  were  baptized  into  Jesus  Christ, 
were  baptized  into  his  death."  And  this  is  explained  by 
what  follows.  "  In  that  Christ  died,  he  died  unto  sin 
(or  on  account  of  sin)  once ;  but  in  that  he  liveth,  he 
liveth  unto  God.  Likewise  reckon  ye  also  yourselves  to 
be  dead  indeed  unto  sin,  (or  in  respect  to  sin,)  but  alive 
unto  God  through  Jesus  Christ."  This  is  what  was  sig- 
nified by  baptism.  And  so  believers  were  baptized  into 
Chris fs  death:  not  that  baptism  was  a  symbol  of  death, 
or  the  state  of  the  dead ;  for  water,  or  washing  in  water, 
never  was  a  symbol  of  this.  But  water,  used  in  cere- 
monial, Avhether  by  washing  or  sprinkling,  and  after- 
wards in  Christian  baptism,  always  signified  the  fact,  or 
the  acknowledged  necessity  oi purification.  Now  being 
dead  or  in  a  state  of  death  to  sin,  is  the  same  thing  as  to 
l)e  spiritually  purified,  or  made  holy.  And  this  is  the 
very  thing  that  baptism,  coming  in  the  place  of  ablutions 
under  the  former  economy,  is  exactly  adapted  to  signify. 
Or,  to  say  all  in  a  word,  water  used  in  baptism  is  a  sign 
of  that  moral  purification  of  believers,  which  the  apostle 
means  to  express  by  their  being  crucified,  dead,  and  con- 
formed to  Christ's  death.  Their  being  dead  in  conformity 
with  Christ,  is  the  expression  which  contains  the  met- 
aphor. And  baptism,  as  an  appointed  token  or  symbol, 
denotes  what  is  signified  by  the  metaphor,  not  the  meta- 
phor itself."' 

It  appears  then  that  nothing  more  was  intended  by  the 
figure  in  the  text,  than  to  set  forth  that  by  being  baptized 
into  the  death  of  Christ,  we  profess  to  be  dead  and  buried 
in  respect  to  sin,  without  any  reference  whatever  to  the 
mode  in  which  either  the  burial  or  the  baptism  might  be 
performed.  And  continuing  the  meta.phor,  even  as  Christ 

'See  Dr.  Miller  on  baptism. 


MODE    or    BAPTISM.  247 

lived  a  new  lite  after  his  death  and  resurrection,  so  we, 
having  professed  Christ  at  our  baptism,  are  now,  as 
members  of  his  body,  bound  to  lead  a  new  life,  that  is,  a 
holy  life;  so  that  every  Christian  can  say,  with  Paul — 
"I  am  crucified  with  Christ;  I  have  been  made  con- 
formable to  his  death ;  being  dead  indeed  to  sin,  and  alive 
to  God  by  Jesus  Christ." 

In  Dr.  Wardlaw's  Dissertation,  we  find  the  following 
confirmatory  remark: — "Now  it  is  quite  obvious,  that 
the  ars;ument  of  the  apostle  has  not  the  remotest  connec- 
tion with  the  mode  of  baptism.  There  is  not  the  most 
distant  occasion  for  the  supposition  of  any  such  allusion, 
in  order  to  render  the  passage  intelligible ;  nor  does  the 
allusion,  when  supposed,  impart  to  it  any  addition  of 
force  or  propriety.  The  meaning  does  not,  in  the  least 
degree,  depend  on  the  manner  of  performing  the  cere- 
mony: it  turns  entirely  on  its  being  baptism  into  Chrisfs 
death.  Provided  it  was  this,  it  makes  not  the  smallest 
difference  to  the  apostle's  statement,  or  argument,  or  con- 
clusion, whether  we  suppose  it  to  have  been  by  immer- 
sion, by  pouring,  or  by  sprinkling." 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

2.  Col.  ii.  12,  "Buried  with  him  in  baptism,  wherein 
also  ye  are  risen  with  him  through  the  faith  of  the  opera- 
tion of  God,  who  hath  raised  him  from  the  dead." — As 
this  text  is  so  very  similar  to  the  one  just  examined,  the 
preceding  remarks  apply  to  it,  and  hence  we  shall  dismiss 
it  Math  a  few  words.  The  Avhole  context  so  plainly 
proves  that  the  phrase  "buried  in  baptism"  is  figurative, 
that  we  shall  lose  no  time  in  an  attempt  to  establish  it. 
It  means  that  as  a  man  literally  dead  and  buried,  "  is  cut 
off  from  all  temporal  connections  and  indulgences ;  so 
the  baptized  man  is  really,  or  at  least  by  profession,  dead 
to  sin,  and  in  this  way  made  conformable  to  the  death  of 
Christ  in  its  great  design  and  efficiency,  which  are  to  pu- 
rify to  himself  a  peculiar  people,  dead  to  the  world,  dead 
to  carnal  ambition,  and  secluded  from  every  unhallowed 
practice." — Besides  other  objections  to  explaining  this 
text  in  reference  to  the  mode  of  baptism,  there  is  one  on 
the  very  face  of  it,  which  is  insuperable.  The  individ- 
ual who  is  plunged  rises  from  the  water  by  the  muscular 
strength  of  the  man  who  plunges  him,  or  at  least  by 
physical  power,  whereas  Paul  here  says,  "risen  through 
the  faith  of  the  operation  of  God."  Of  course  then,  he 
cannot  allude  to  submersion. 

3.  1  Cor.  XV.  29.  "Else  what  shall  they  do  who  are 
baptized  for  (u^«g)  or  over  the  dead,  if  the  dead  rise  not 
at  all?" — The  signification  of  this  passage  is  somewhat 
obscure ;  TertuUian,  Theophilact  and  Epiphanius  inform 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  219 

US,  that  it  was  the  custom  of  the  Marcionites  and  Corin- 
thians, if  a  catechumen  died  before  his  baptism,  to  bap- 
tize some  other  in  his  stead,  as  the  apostle  here  seems  to 
intimate.  And  as  the  early  Christians  regarded  with 
much  veneration  the  graves  of  martyrs,  and  occasionally 
held  assemblies  on  the  spot,  it  is  supposed  that  in  these 
vicarious  baptisms,  the  rite  was  performed  over  his  grave. 
Tliis  would  be  the  obvious  meaning  of  the  apostle,  if  his 
language  (^tti^)  in  this  passage  signifies  over,  as  it  cer- 
tainly often  does  in  Greek  writers.  But  could  the  bap- 
tisms over  the  graves  of  martyrs  be  performed  by  immer- 
sion ?     Were  their  graves  dug  at  the  bottom  of  rivers  ?' 

4.  1  Cor.  X.  1 — 2,  "  Moreover,  brethren,  I  would  not 
tliat  you  should  be  ignorant,  how  that  all  our  fathers  were 
under  the  cloud,  and  all  passed  through  the  sea ;  and 
were  all  baptized  into  Moses  in  the  cloud  and  in  the  sea." 
The  fact  here  referred  to  is  recorded  Exod.  xiv ;  from 
which  we  learn  that  the  Red  Sea,  through  which  the 
Israelites  passed,  was  divided  before  them ;  that  the 
waters  stood  up  on  each  side  like  a  wall ;  and  that  they 
travelled  through  on  dry  ground.  We  also  learn  that 
the  cloud  by  which  their  course  was  supernaturally  di- 
rected, did  not  discharge  itself  upon  them  in  the  form  of 
an  overwhelming  shower,  much  less  submerge  them; 
that  it  sometimes  preceded  and  sometimes  followed  them. 
In  all  this,  there  was  nothing  that  even  resembled  sub- 
mersion ;  but  they  were  doubtless  sprinkled  by  drops 
from  the  miraculous  cloud,  when  it  passed  over  their 
heads,  or  at  least  by  the  spray  of  the  sea,  particularly  as 
we  are  told  that  a  high  wind  prevailed  at  the  time,  and  in 
this  sprinkling  their  children  shared  as  much  as  they. 
The  only  submersion  that  took  place  on  that  occasion 
was  that  experienced  by  the  Egyptians,  who  were  indeed 

Popular  Theology,  pp.  222—3. 


250  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

"buried  in  a  watery  grave,"  from  which  they  never 
emerged ;  but  this  the  apostle  does  not  term  a  baptism. 

5.  1  Peter  iii.  20 — 21,  "The  long-suffering  of  God 
waited  in  the  days  of  Noah,  while  the  ark  was  a  preparing, 
wherein  few,  that  is  eight  souls,  were  saved  by  water. 
The  like  figure  whereunto  even  baptism  doth  also  now 
save  us,  (not  the  putting  away  of  the  filth  of  the  flesh, 
but  the  answer  of  a  good  conscience  towards  God,)  by 
the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ." — Tlie  only  beings 
saved  from  the  deluge,  were  Noah  and  those  with  him 
in  the  ark  ;  but  these  were  not  submersed,  while  all  the 
rest  of  the  world  was,  and  perished  !  Submersion  on 
this  occasion  proved  as  fatal  as  in  the  case  of  the  Egyp- 
tians who  were  "buried"  in  the  Red  sea.  Submersion 
was  the  very  evil  from  which  the  ark  Avas  the  instrument 
of  deliverance.  Baptism  is  here  represented  as  a  means 
of  salvation  "  by  (or  through)  the  resurrection  of  Jesus 
Christ."  This  however,  all  Avill  admit,  it  can  only  be 
to  those  who  receive  the  thing  signified  by  baptism, 
which  is  the  renewing  and  cleansing  influences  of  the 
Holy  Gliost.  All  such  are  saved  in  this  life  from  their 
sins,  and  through  the  resurrection  of  Christ  from  the 
dead,  have  the  well-grounded  hope  of  eternal  glory.  We 
further  learn,  that  as  a  means  of  salvation  it  was  pre- 
figured; — but  by  what? — by  the  waters  of  the  flood  ? — 
certainly  not,  for  they  Avere  the  means  of  destruction  ?  it 
must  then  have  been  by  the  ark.  It  may  also  be  re- 
marked that  the  ark  was  not  submersed,  for  had  it  been 
so,  all  must  have  perished  ?  but  it  was  borne  aloft  on  the 
surface  of  the  Avater,  (not  doAvn  under  it)  and  M^as  sprinkled 
with  the  rain  that  fell  from  heaven. 

This  text  then  says  nothing  in  behalf  of  submersion, 
but  is  rather  from  the  circumstance  just  mentioned,  in 
favor  of  sprinkling.     But  in  any  event,  it  is    "wof  the 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  251 

putting  aivay  of  the  filth  of  the  flesh"  washing,  or  cleans- 
ing, or  even  sprinkling  of  the  body,  that  can  avail,  "  but 
the  answer  of  a  good  conscience  towards  God,"  namely, 
the  covenant  Avith  God,  made  in  baptism,  to  preserve  a 
conscience  void  of  offence  by  leading  a  holy  life, — such 
a  life  as  will  exhibit  the  purification  of  our  nature  by  the 
laver  of  regeneration.  We  are  accordingly  most  im- 
pressively cautioned  against  undue  attachment  to  the  out- 
ward rite,  since  that  will  not  save  us,  and  admonished  to 
look  to  the  substance. 

We  have  now  examined  all  the  important  passages  of 
the  New  Testament,  which  are  usually  introd\iced  into 
this  controversy,  and  which  are  in  the  remotest  manner 
calculated  to  reflect  any  light  on  the  point  at  issue.  In 
none  of  these  passages  have  we  discovered  the  slightest 
evidence  in  favor  of  submersion  ; — not  even  a  word,  or 
incidental  remark,  much  less  a  fact  that  would  even  seem 
to  require  submersion.  On  the  contrary  the  whole  of 
the  argument  is  of  an  adverse  character,  and  preponderates 
overwhelmingly  on  the  side  of  baptism  by  affusion. 

Thus  far  then,  our  investigations  have  resulted  in  the 
most  triumphant  confirmation  of  the  proposition  with 
which  we  at  first  set  out,  viz.  "  that  the  writings  of  the 
New  Testament  afford  no  proof,  either  in  the  literal  terms 
used  in  reference  to  baptism  ;  or  in  the  circumstances 
attending  its  administration ;  or  in  the  metaphorical  lan- 
guage applied  to  it,  that  it  was  performed  by  submer- 


CHAPTER  XV. 

The  next  proposition  that  calls  for  attention  is  : 
Is  the  mode  of  baptism  of  such  essential  importance 
that  the  example  would  he  binding  on  us ;  coidd  it  be 
conclusively   shoivn  that   either  mode   constituted  the 
primitive  practice  ? 

The  attentive  reader  has  doubtless  already  inferred 
from  what  has  been  said,  that  we  regard  the  question  re- 
specting the  mode  of  applying  water  in  baptism  as  non- 
essential, and  were  we  not  acquainted  with  the  lamenta- 
ble proneness  of  poor,  erring  man  to  lose  sight  of  the 
substance  and  attach  undue  weight  to  mere  forms,  we 
should  be  at  a  loss  to  account  for  the  vast  amount  of  con- 
troversy,— conducted,  alas !  too  often  in  a  spirit  utterly  un- 
worthy of  the  Christian  character,  to  which  this  question 
has  given  rise.  Long  before  the  introduction  of  Christian 
baptism,  this  propensity  marred  the  beauty  and  harmony 
of  God's  house,  and  called  forth  the  severest  rebukes  from 
him  and  his  faithful  servants.  "To  what  purpose  is  the 
multitude  of  your  sacrifices  unto  me  ?  Saith  the  Lord  : 
I  am  full  of  the  burnt  offerings  of  rams,  and  the  fat  of  fed 
beasts  ;  and  I  delight  not  in  the  blood  of  bullocks,  or  of 
lambs,  or  of  he-goats."  *  *  *  Bring  no  more  vain  obla- 
tions :  incense  is  an  abomination  unto  me :  the  new 
moons  and  sabbaths,  the  calling  of  assemblies,  I  cannot 
away  with :  it  is  iniquity  even  the  solemn  meeting.  Your 
new  moons  and  your  appointed  feasts  my  soul  hateth : 
they  are  a  trouble  unto  me,  I  am  weary  to  bear  them." 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  253 

Isaiah  i.  11 — 14.  "For  I  desired  mercy  and  not  sacri- 
fice ;  and  the  knowledge  of  God  more  than  burnt  offer- 
ings." Hosea  vi.  6.'  Our  blessed  Lord  and  his  apos- 
tles also  found  it  necessary  to  caution  the  Jews  again  and 
again  against  this  tendency  of  their  nature,  and  availed 
themselves  of  every  occasion  to  instruct  them  in  the  plain 
but  too  much  neglected  truth,  that  external  observances, 
even  though  of  divine  appointment,  were  of  but  little  con- 
sideration, in  comparison  with  the  spirit  of  those  obser- 
vances. "  Woe  unto  you  scribes  and  Pharisees,  hypo- 
crites !  for  ye  pay  tithe  of  mint,  and  anise  and  cummen  and 
have  omitted  the  Aveightier  matters  of  the  law,  judgment, 
mercy  and  faith."  Matt,  xxiii.  23.  "Ye  observe,"  says 
the  apostle,  "  days  and  months  and  times  and  years.  I 
am  afraid  of  you,  lest  I  have  bestowed  upon  you  labor  in 
vain."  Gal.  iv.  10 — 11.  "Let  no  man  therefore  judge 
you  in  meat  or  in  drink,  or  in  respect  of  an  holy-day,  or 
of  the  new  moon  or  the  sabbath  days."     Col.  ii.  16. 

Those  who  have  carefully  looked  at  the  state  of  the 
church  in  the  present  day,  and  noticed  the  devotedness 
with  which  men  are  wedded  to  the  externals  of  religion, 
and  the  warmtTi  and  even  acrimony  Avith  which  they  too 
often  contend  for  their  own  peculiar  forms,  must  admit 
that  the  foregoing  warnings  are  as  necessary  at  present 
as  they  were  in  former  times.  We  still  have  need  to  re- 
mind men,  that  true  religion  does  not  consist  in  meats  and 
drinks  and  divers  washings,^  &c.,  i.  e.  outward  things 
which  can  have  no  direct  moral  influence  upon  the  soul ; 
or  in  other  words,  that  "  the  kingdom  of  God  is  not  meat 
and  drink,  (not  external  ceremonies)  but  righteousness 

'See  also  1  Sam.  XV.  22.     Jer.  vi.  20,  and  vii.  21— 23.     Amos  v. 
21—25.     Micah  vi.  6—8,  and  many  others. 
^Heb,  ix.  10. 
22 


254  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

and  peace  and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost.'"  When  mere 
forms  become  the  subjects  of  controversy,  the  danger  of 
giving  them  an  importance  and  prominence  which  they 
do  not  deserve,  and  of  overlooking  their  essence  and 
their  end  is  doubly  great.  Hence  we  may  in  most  of 
such  cases,  without  much  hazard  of  being  justly  charged 
with  impertinence,  address  the  zealous  disputants  in  the 
spirit  of  the  apostle's  language  :  "  Ye  observe  days  and 
months  and  times  and  years,  I  am  afraid  of  you  ;"  "  for 
in  Christ  Jesus  neither  circumcision  availeth  any  thing, 
nor  uncircumcision,"  neither  Judaism  nor  heathenism  ; 
neither  forms  nor  anodes  ;  neither  submersion  nor 
sprinkling,  ^'C,  but  faith  which  worketh  by  love.^  These 
considerations  appear  to  us  to  apply  with  peculiar  force 
to  the  mode  of  baptism,  inasmuch  as  this,  as  intimated 
in  our  proposition,  can  by  no  means  be  essential  to  the 
validity  of  the  ordinance ;  and  hence  whatever  may  have 
been  the  practice  of  the  primitive  Christians  in  this  respect, 
it  has  no  binding  application  to  us.  Our  reasons,  among 
others,  are  the  following  : 

1.  No  particular  mode  has  been  pointed  out  in  the 
Bible  to  the  exclusion  of  every  other  mode.  This  we 
think  has  been  conclusively  established.  The  most 
patient  and  impartial  examination  of  every  legitimate 
source  of  argument,  has  certainly  left  us  without  one 
particle  of  proof  in  favor  of  submersion.  Though  the 
inspired  writers  speak  of  baptism,  directly  or  indirectly 
in  almost  every  page  of  the  New  Testament  and  under  a 
great  variety  of  aspects,  yet  they  have  not  employed  a 
single  term,  or  stated  a  single  fact,  or  used  a  single  figure 
of  speech,  which  evinces  that  they  either  preferred  or 
practised  submersion  in  any  case.     They  have   indeed 

'Romxiv.  n.  ^Gal.  V.  6. 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  255 

related  some  occurrences  which  cannot  possibly,  in  our 
view,  be  reconciled  with  plunging,  but  in  no  instance 
have  they  made  a  representation  which  is  not  entirely 
reconcilable  with  the  practice  of  perfusion  or  sprinkling. 
On  the  supposition  that  the  doctrine  of  our  Baptist  breth- 
ren is  ti'ue,  this  is  a  most  unaccountable  fact.  What ! 
not  one  evangelist  or  apostle — though  taught  by  the  Spirit 
of  God  what  to  say — kind  enough  or  wise  enough  to  put 
this  matter  beyond  a  doubt  ?  The  unavoidable  inference 
is,  that  the  inspired  writers  did  not  deem  the  mode  of  ap- 
plying water  in  baptism,  an  essential  matter  ;  and  did  not 
therefore  think  it  necessary  to  state  it  precisely.* 

At  the  same  time  we  readily  admit  that  however  nu- 
merous and  cogent  the  arguments  in  favor  of  affusion, 
amounting,  in  our  estimation,  to  proof  demonstrative,  yet 
our  investigations  have  not  resulted  in  the  decided  con- 
viction, that  this  mode  is  prescribed,  to  the  rejection  of 
every  other.  Obviously  then,  if  we  contend  for  any  one 
mode  exclusively  of  every  other,  we  transcend  our  author- 
ity ;  "  we  attempt  to  do,  what  Christ  and  the  apostles 
left  undone;  what  they  left  undone,  for  the  very  purpose 
of  showing,  that  they  did  not  regard  the  particular  form 
of  the  rite  as  of  any  material  consequence,  and  so  would 
have  Christians  at  liberty  to  vary  the  form,  as  circum- 
stances might  require." 

It  will  avail  our  Baptist  brethren  nothing,  to  contend, 
tliatthe  mode  of  applying  the  water  is  distinctly  defined  ^ 
for,  independently  of  all  the  previous  irrefragable  reason- 
ing to  the  contrary,  this  position  would  stand  forth  in  the 
very  face  of  the  most  glaring  and  stubborn  facts.  The 
diversity  of  sentiment  prevailing  among  many  learned  and 
pious  men ;  the  numerous  public  and  private  controver- 

'See  Dr.  Miller  on  Baptism. 


256  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

sies ;  the  scores  upon  scores  of  pamphlets  and  books 
published  on  both  sides  of  the  question  ; — all  go  to  estab- 
lish most  conclusively  the  point,  that  the  mode  of  tising 
the  water  is  not  specified  in  the  Scriptures,  neither  by 
precept,  example  nor  incidental  circumstances.  This 
then,  in  itself,  proves  incontestibly  that  it  cannot  be  a 
matter  of  essential  moment,  and  therefore,  that  whatever 
may  have  been  the  practice  of  the  early  Christians,  their 
example  in  this  respect  is  not  binding  on  us. 


CHAPTER  XVL 

2.  ^^gain,  that  the  mode  of  baptism  is  7iot  essential 
and  the  primitive  example  not  obligatory,  may  be  proved 
from  ANALOGY.  If  it  can  be  mad  eappear  that  in  analo- 
gous cases  the  mode  of  administering  a  divine  and  posi- 
tive institution,  has  been  admitted  by  inspired  as  well  as 
uninspired  men,  to  be  of  no  essential  importance,  it  will 
follow  that  baptism  belongs  to  the  same  category.  We 
shall  endeavor  to  establish  this  position  in  reference  to — 

(a.)  The  jmssover.  This  ordinance  was  instituted  of 
God  in  memory  of  the  deliverance  of  Israel  from  Egyp- 
tian bondage ;  explicit  directions  were  given  as  to  the 
time,  manner,  &c.,  of  the  celebration.  But  these  direc- 
tions were  not  always  strictly  observed,  for  the  obvious 
reason  that  they  were  not  considered  essential.  God  had 
ordained  that  it  should  be  celebrated  in  i]\Q  first  month  of 
the  year,  but  in  the  days  of  Hezekiah  it  was  kept  in  the 
second  month  ;^  the  law  also  prohibited  persons  who 
were  ceremonially  unclean  from  participating  in  the  so- 
lemnity, but  on  the  occasion  just  mentioned,  many  who 
had  not  purified  themselves,  "  kept  the  feast."  For  a 
"  multitude  of  the  people,  even  many  of  Ephraim,  &c., 
had  not  cleansed  themselves  ;  yet  did  they  eat  the  pass- 
over,  otherwise  than  it  ivas  ivritten.^  It  may  further  be 
added,  that  the  Lcvites  "  killed  the  passover,^^  whereas 
this  duty  belonged  properly  to  the  people  f  and  they  also 

'2  Chron.  xxx.  13.  "Ibid.  v.  18.  n  chron.  xxx.  17. 

22* 


258  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

assisted  more  than  the  law  allowed,  in  offering  the  sacri- 
fices, particularly  those  that  were  for  the  purifying  of  the 
unclean.  Now,  let  it  be  remembered  that  all  these  exter- 
nal departures  from  the  plainly  prescribed  rules,  were 
practised  under  the  very  eye  and  superintendence  of  that 
holy  and  inspired  man  of  God,  Hezekiah,  and  with  the 
consent  and  co-operation  of  the  Priests  and  Levites  ; 
moreover,  notwithstanding  the  deviations,  the  Lord  was 
well  pleased  and  sanctioned  the  whole  transaction  with 
the  tokens  of  his  approbation  and  love  ;  for  it  is  said : 
"  Their  voice  was  heard  and  their  prayer  came  up  to  his 
holy  dwelling  place,  even  unto  heaven.'" 

Should  it  be  urged  that  Hezekiah  did  not,  himself, 
deem  those  variations  proper  and  therefore  prayed  God  to 
pardon  them,  we  answer,  that  this  does  not  reach  the 
essence  of  the  case.  We  manifestly  have  here  a  want  of 
outward  conformity  in  several  respects  to  the  legal  regu- 
lations, specifying  the  mode  of  celebrating  the  passover; 
a  divinely  inspired  man  did  not  consider  the  efficacy  of 
the  ordinance  at  all  invalidated  on  that  account,  and  God 
himself  impressed  upon  it  the  broad  seal  of  his  approba- 
tion. Grotius  very  properly  observes  here,  that  "  ritual 
institutions  must  give  way  not  only  to  a  public  necessity, 
but  to  a  public  benefit  and  advantage;"  and  the  pious  M. 
Henry  says,  "let  the  circumstance  give  way  to  the  sub- 
stance, and  let  not  the  thing  itself  be  lost  upon  a  nicety 
about  the  time."  This  case  is  indeed  in  some  points 
analogous  to  baptism,  but  in  others  it  is  a  much  stronger 
exemplification  of  departure  from  original  usage,  than 
sprinkling  would  be  from  submersion,  upon  the  supposi- 
tion that  submersion  was  the  primitive  mode ;  for  in  rela- 
tion to  keeping  the  passover,  the  mode  was  expressly 

'2  Chron.  xxx.  21. 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  259 

pointed  out,  but  not  so  in  baptism ;  and  yet,  the  non- 
compliance with  that  plainly  prescribed  mode,  did  not 
affect  the  validity  of  the  passover.  How  much  less  can 
the  mode  of  baptism,  which  is  not  specified,  be  thought 
essential? 

Again,  those  who  read  the  bible  attentively,  know  that 
the  passover  was  required  to  be  commemorated  with 
shoes  on  the  feet  and  staves  in  the  hand,  and  this  practice 
was  emblematic  of  a  historical  fact ;  yet  neither  our  Lord 
nor  his  apostles  adhered  to  it ;  nor  had  it  been  observed 
for  many  years  previously.  And  why  ? — because  it  was 
a  collateral  circumstance  not  necessarily  connected  with 
the  spirit  of  the  ordinance.  And  will  any  one  venture  to 
assert  that  this  deviation  from  the  original  mode,  ren- 
dered the  institution  of  non-effect,  or  in  any  degree  im- 
paired its  validity  ?  Then  let  the  controversy  be  waged 
with  Jesus  Christ  and  his  holy  apostles,  for  it  was  they 
who  thus  varied  from  the  original  instructions,  and  that 
too  without  pretending  to  make  any  alteration  or  improve- 
ment in  the  ordinance. 

Our  position  is  equally  true  in  relation  to 
(b.)  The  LorcPs  supper. — The  external  mode  of  cele- 
brating this  institution  is  not  expressly  prescribed,  but 
we  know  precisely  what  was  the  example  of  our  Lord 
and  his  apostles.  They  met  in  the  night ;  not  on  the 
Lord's  day,  but  on  Thursday  ;  not  in  a  house  of  public 
worship,  but  in  an  upper  chamber  of  aprivate  dwelling  ; 
they  used  unleavened  bread  and  the  pure  juice  of  the 
grape,  and  received  the  supper  not  standing,  sitting  nor 
kneeling,  but  in  a  recumbent  posture,  half  sitting  and 
half  lying.  Now  will  any  intelligent  Christian  maintain, 
that  a  strict  adherence  to  all  these  particulars  is  necessary 
to  the  validity  of  the  holy  supper  ?     We  think  not,  for. 


260  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

in  this  event,  our  Baptist  brethren,  as  well  as  all  other 
religious  denominations  would  be  in  a  sad  perdicament; 
and  it  might  be  truly  affirmed,  that  as  there  is  not  a  branch 
of  Christ's  church  on  earth  in  which  these  particulars  are 
observed,  so  therefore  there  is  not  one  in  which  this  sac- 
rament is  celebrated  !  By  common  consent  then,  it  is 
universally  conceded,  that  the  external  mode  of  commem- 
orating the  love  of  our  dying  Lord,  is  not  essential,  and 
that  the  practice  of  the  early  Christians  does  not  bind  us. 
Now  if  the  prophet  Hezekiah,  and  the  priests  of  God, 
in  his  day,  and  our  Lord  and  his  apostles  in  their  day, 
evidently  regarded  the  external  mode  of  observing  a  divine 
and  positive  ordinance,  as  of  little  consequence  ;  and  if 
all  Christian  denominations  at  present,  conspire  to  pro- 
claim by  their  usage  in  reference  to  the  eucharist,  the  very 
same  doctrine,  why  should  our  Baptist  brethren  form  an 
exception  in  respect  to  baptism  alone  ?  Do  they  not 
thereby  subject  themselves  to  the  charge  of  glaring  incon- 
sistency ?  Are  they  not  bound,  either  to  abandon  the 
ground  they  occupy  as  to  baptism,  or  else  to  take  the 
same  position  in  reference  to  the  eucharist  ? 

They  may  however  answer,  "  we  do  conform  to  the 
example  of  Christ  and  his  apostles,  so  far  as  we  conve- 
niently can ;  but  it  would  be  inexpedient  to  have  the  sup- 
per in  an  upper  chamber  and  after  it  is  dark ; — to  recline 
at  the  table  on  a  couch,  would  not  be  agreeable  to  the 
usage  of  the  present  day,  nor  be  thought  suitable  or  de- 
cent; and  as  to  the  unleavened  bread  and  pure  grape-juice, 
these  are  unimportant  and  do  not  enter  into  the  essential 
constituency  of  the  ordinance ;  besides,  the  latter  is  diffi- 
cult to  procure."  Thus  our  Baptist  brethren  may  and 
probably  do  argue,  and  we  grant  that  the  argument  is 
satisfactory ;  but  why  not  adopt  the  same  process  of  rea- 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  2G1 

soning  in  regard  to  baptism  ?  why  not  admit  the  plea  of 
convenience,  suitableness,  decency,  and  uniinportance  of 
mere  externals,  in  one  case  as  well  as  the  other  ?  This 
plea  would  certainly  be  better  founded  in  reference  to 
baptism,  than  to  the  eucharist,  because  our  Saviour's  di- 
rections respecting  the  latter  are  more  explicit,  for  he 
says  :  "  This  do  ye  in  remembrance  of  me;"  that  is,  eat 
this  bread  (unleavened)  and  drink  this  ivine  (the  pure 
juice  of  the  grape)  in  remembrance  of  me.  He  has  not 
done  any  thing  like  as  much  to  enjoin  exact  conformity 
in  relation  to  baptism. 

We  have  now  brought  before  the  reader  no  less  than 
three  distinct  cases,  in  which  conformity  to  the  outward 
mode  of  observing  divine  ordinances,  has  been  shown  to 
be  non-essential ;  in  the  first  two  cases  even  inspired  men 
(including  our  Lord  himself)  varied,  not  only  from  the 
ancient  but  from  the  expressly  prescribed  usage,  and  in 
the  other,  the  whole  Christian  church  in  the  present  day 
habitually  varies.  This  argument  has  been  introduced 
upon  the  supposition  that  submersion  was  the  original 
mode  of  baptism,  which,  however,  is  in  no  wise  admitted, 
and  cannot  by  any  possibility  be  proved  ;  but  even  upon 
this  gratuitous  supposition,  it  appears  we  are  under  no 
obligation  to  conform.  We  repeat  then,  that  if  it  could 
be  established  that  the  primitive  Christians  practised  sub- 
mersion, we  should  by  no  means  be  bound  to  adhere  to 
that  practice,  and  would  regard  affusion  (for  reasons 
which  will  be  stated  in  the  sequel)  to  be  decidedly  the 
best  and  most  suitable  mode.  For,  unless  it  can  be  shown 
that  total  plunging  was  actually  prescribed  and  was  in- 
tended to  symbolize  something  which  cannot  be  otherwise 
equally  well  set  forth,  then  the  example  of  Hezekiah  and 
of  our  Master  himself,  authorizes  us  to  consider  such 


362  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

plunging  as  a  mere  circumstance, — an  accident  not  essen- 
tially belonging  to  the  ordinance.  All  that  Ave  are  bound 
to  look  to,  so  far  as  water  is  concerned,  is  the  preserva- 
tion of  its  symbolical  expression;  that  being  retained, 
the  sacrament  is  complete,  so  far  as  the  outward  element 
can  make  it  so. 

Suppose  the  idea  designed  to  be  expressed  by  the 
water,  is  moral  cleansing  ;  is  it  not  plain  that  aspersion 
or  affusion  represents  that  idea  as  effectually  as  plunging? 
Were  not  the  most  of  the  typical  purifications  under  the 
ceremonial  law,  exhibited  by  sprinkling  and  that  too  by 
God's  own  appointment?  And  are  we  not  thereby 
taught,  that  in  the  divine  judgment,  sprinkling  is  even  a 
more  appropriate  emblem  of  moral  purification  than  sub- 
mersion ? 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

3.  Another  proof  that  the  mode  of  baptism  is  not 
essential,  and  the  example  of  the  early  Christians  not 
binding,  may  be  found  in  the  fact  that  God  equally  ap- 
proves of  sincere  Christians,  whether  baptized  by  sub- 
mersion or  sprinkling.  AVhat  we  mean  is,  that  the 
question  as  to  the  divine  judgment  respecting  Christians, 
depends  not  on  the  form  of  their  baptism,  but  altogether 
upon  their  real,  actual  character;  if  they  are  holy,  they 
are  equally  objects  of  God's  approbation,, — if  unholy — of 
his  disapprobation,  irrespective  of  the  manner  in  which 
they  have  been  baptized.  Their  not  observing  an  exter- 
nal ordinance  in  the  same  manner,  can  be  of  no  account 
with  God.  For  this  view  of  the  subject  we  are  indebted 
to  Dr.  Woods  and  we  shall  adopt  his  statement  of  it. 

"  That  God  does  in  fact  regard  Christians,  who  are 
baptized  in  different  ways,  with  equal  approbation,  might 
be  made  evident  from  the  representations  of  his  word, 
and  from  his  actual  administration.  But  formal  proof 
cannot  be  necessary.  Those  who  are  familiar  with  the 
scriptures  have  learned,  that  God  judges  of  men,  in  the 
manner  I  have  described.  And  we  cannot  fail  to  receive 
the  same  impression  from  what  is  manifest  in  his  admin- 
istration. I  am  happy  to  acknowledge  those,  who  prefer 
immersion  as  the  mode  of  baptism,  to  be  sincere  friends 
of  Christ;  and  I  would  not  cease  to  rejoice  in  all  the 


264  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

tokens  of  the  divine  favor  which  they  receive.     But  do 
not  those  Christians,  who  use  sprinkling  or  affusion,  re- 
ceive as  many  tokens  of  divine  favor  ?     Does  not  God 
give  them  as  high  a  degi^ee  of  the  influence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  ?     And  in  consequence  of  this  do  they  not  exhibit 
as  high  a  degree  of  sanctification  ?     Have  they  not  as  ar- 
dent love  to  the  Saviour,  and  as  much  zeal  for  the  promo- 
tion of  his  cause  ?     Do  they  not  labor  as  diligently  and 
pray  as  fervently  for  the  salvation  of  the  world?     Are  not 
their  labors  as  succcessful  ?     And  do  not  their  prayers 
meet  with  as  much  acceptance,  and  obtain  as  many  gra- 
cious answers  ?     Do  they  not  as  sensibly  enjoy  the  pre- 
sence of  God  in  the  special  ordinances  of  the  gospel,  in 
seasons  of  affliction,  and  in  the  hour  of  death  ?     Will  not 
as  welcome  and  joyful  an  entrance  be  ministered  to  them 
into  the  everlasting  kingdom  of  their  Saviour?     And  will 
they  not  enjoy  as  high  a  degree  of  blessedness  in  heaven? 
Now,  if  it  is  indeed  so,  that  God  grants  to  those  who 
believe  sprinkling  or  affusion  to  be  a  proper  mode  of  bap- 
tism, as  many  tokens  of  his  approbation  and  love,  as  to 
those  who  prefer  immersion  :  is  not  the  conclusion  per- 
fectly obvious,  that  God  does  not  consider  the  particular 
form  of  baptism  to  be  of  any  essential  consequence  as  to 
the  great  interests  of  religion  ?     It  clearly  follows  then, 
that  we  ought  to  love  the  followers  of  Christ  who  baptize 
in  one  way,  as  much  as  those  who  baptize  in  another 
way  ;  and  that  if  we  consider  the  form  of  this  rite  as  of 
any  essential  consequence,  or  suffer  it  to  have  any  great 
influence    upon   our  feelings,  we   commit  a  lamentable 
mistake,  and  in  regard  to  this  point,  place  ourselves  in 
opposition  to  the  mind  of  God.     And  how  deeply  is  it  to 
be  deplored,  that  any  Christians  should,  through  weak- 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  265 

ness  or  imperfection,  cherish  views  and  feelings,  which 
are  at  variance  with  the  divine  will  and  the  divine  admin- 
istration !" 

4.  A  fourth  reason  why  we  regard  the  practice  of  the 
early  Christians  in  reference  to  the  mode  of  baptism,  as 
possessing  no  binding  force  on  us,  is  derived  from  the 
consideration,  that  even  they  tvere  liable  to  err  and  to  be 
influenced  by  their  pecidiar  education  and  habits. — We 
readily  concede,  that  those  who  enjoyed  the  personal  in- 
structions of  our  Saviour  and  his  apostles,  possessed  ad- 
vantages from  which  we  are  necessarily  excluded ; — ad- 
vantages Mdiich  would  seem  to  invest  their  example  with 
a  degree  of  authority  over  the  faith  of  all  succeeding 
generations  of  the  church.  Hence,  that  popular  opinion 
which  is  so  prone  to  pay  a  blind  veneration  to  the  exam- 
ple of  the  early  Christians ;  hence  the  fancied  pre-emi- 
nence for  virtue  and  orthodoxy,  of  those  who  think  they 
can  find  a  precedent  for  their  conduct  or  a  sanction  for 
their  belief  in  the  opinions  and  forms  of  the  primitive 
church.  But  we  must  confess,  that  while  we  entertain 
the  profoundest  regard  for  the  example  of  our  Lord  and 
the  apostles,  and  of  all  others  who  taught  and  acted  under 
the  unerring  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  we  cannot  ac- 
cord to  others  who  were  fallible  men  like  ourselves,  the 
same  degree  of  respect,  just  because  they  lived  in,  or 
immediately  after,  the  apostolic  age.  The  advantages 
enjoyed  on  their  part,  find  a  potent  offset  in  the  superior 
state  of  moral  and  intellectual  improvement  of  the  pre- 
sent day,  as  the  facts  in  our  relative  histories  amply  de- 
monstrate. The  early  churches  were  formed  from  Jew- 
ish or  gentile  converts,  who  had  alike  been  brought  up 
in  the  vilest  superstitions.  The  influence  of  their  early 
education  and  original  habits  was  felt  long  after  their  es- 
23 


266  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

pousals  to  Christianity.  Even  under  the  priming  hand 
and  the  vigilant  eye  of  Paul,  there  sprang  up,  in  the  very 
bosom  of  the  primitive  church,  the  rank  weeds  of  false 
doctrine  and  of  a  barbarous  religion.  Endless  disputes 
on  points  of  no  importance  were  warmly  prosecuted ; — 
disputes  which  could  have  been  generated  only  in  super- 
stitious and  ignorant  minds.  Even  the  solemn  ordinance 
of  the  holy  supper,  in  reference  to  which  Christ's  instruc- 
tions and  example  were  so  very  plain,  was  ignorantly  and 
wickedly  turned  into  a  bacchanalian  revel!  So  prone 
were  they  to  abuse  the  institutions  of  Christianity,  that 
Paul  in  his  letter  to  the  Corinthians  (ch.  i.  14 — 15)  gives 
utterance  to  this  strange  declaration:  "I  thank  God  that 
1  baptized  none  of  you  but  Crispus  and  Gaius ;  lest  any 
should  say  that  I  baptized  in  mine  own  nameJ'^  But  if 
we  pass  over  to  the  second  and  third  centuries,  we  shall 
find  a  state  of  things  still  more  deplorable.  Here  the 
true  genius  of  the  oriental  philosophy,  mingling  with  a 
variety  of  vulgar  superstitions,  began  to  display  itself.— 
Who  can  forget  the  ridiculous  ceremonies  at  baptism,  of 
exorcism,  unction,  giving  salt  and  milk  to  the  candidate, — 
attiring  him  in  a  snow-white  robe  and  crowning  him  with 
an  evergreen  ?  And  who,  in  view  of  all  this,  can  per- 
suade himself  that  those  early  Christians, — so  prolific  of 
superstitious  refinings  and  innovations  upon  the  rite  of 
baptism,  as  well  as  in  other  respects,  did  yet  in  regard  to 
the  mode  of  this  rite,  remain  infallible? — and  who,  with 
these  facts  staring  him  in  the  face,  can  seriously  maintain, 
that  their  example  in  a  matter,  not  in  itself  essential,  con- 
stitutes an  authoritative  model  for  us  ? 

But,  says  the  opponent,  our  appeal  goes  beyond  the 
second  and  third  centuries  ;  we  carry  it  up  to  the  apos- 
tolic practice.     Be  it  so  ;  the  weight  of  the   argument 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  267 

from  church  history,  must  doubtless  mamly  hinge  here. 
But  it  has  ah-eady  been  proven,  that  the  whole  force  of 
apostolic  example  is  decidedly  on  our  side  of  the  ques- 
tion. Let  us  not  however  be  misunderstood  ;  we  do  not 
admit  that  even  the  example  of  the  apostles  can,  from 
the  nature  of  the  case,  determine  this  controversy.  In 
addition  to  the  considerations  already  advanced  in  support 
of  this  position,  we  would  merely  remark  here,  that  as 
the  verb  /2iTT/^&i  is  manifestly  a  generic  term,  like  our  own 
verb  ivash,  and  consequently  comprehends  a  variety  of 
modes  of  ablution,  and  the  command  to  baptize  is  there- 
fore not  specific  as  to  the  mode,  it  matters  not  what  may 
have  been  the  precise  practice  of  the  apostles,  that  pecu- 
liar practice  cannot  of  course  be  essential,  and  therefore 
constitutes  no  obligatory  rule  of  faith  or  of  imitation  for 
us.  The  climate  of  Palestine,  and  also  of  many  of  the 
other  countries  where  the  gospel  was  preached  by  the 
apostles,  is  warm.  This  rendered  bathings  frequent,  and 
this  circumstance  of  itself,  might  naturally  be  supposed 
to  have  begotten  in  them  a  predilection  for  immersion, 
even  though  it  were  not  required,  but  only  allowed  by 
the  original  command.  But  in  a  more  rigorous  climate 
where  bathings  are  unfrequent,  and  attended  with  greater 
inconvenience  and  exposure,  a  diverse  propensity  would 
naturally  exist.  The  practice  of  the  church  therefore,  in 
any  age,  setting  aside  denominational  prejudices,  would 
be  likely  to  shape  itself  in  general,  according  to  the  cli- 
mate and  the  corresponding  habits  of  the  people. — There 
is  undoubtedly  more  weight  in  this  remark  than  a  preju- 
diced mind  would  be  willing,  readily  to  concede.  The 
aquatic  habits  of  a  Greenlander  and  an  Otaheitan — we 
mean  their  habits  in  relation  to  bathing,  swimming,  diving, 
&c.,  although   respectively  engendered  by  climate,  are 


268  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

totally  different.  And  when  we  say  that  a  Greenlander, 
if  left  to  the  direction  of  his  own  choice  in  relation  to  the 
mode  of  baptism,  would  feel  a  natural  bias  to  the  practice 
of  aspersion  instead  of  dipping  ;  and  that  an  inhabitant  of 
the  Society  Isles  would  be  naturally  inclined  to  a  choice 
opposite  to  that  of  his  shivering  brother,  we  pay  no  more 
than  a  reasonable  tribute  of  respect  to  the  prejudices  of 
climate.  And  when  we  consider  that  these  prejudices 
are  not  only  innocent  and  unavoidable,  but  highly  salutary 
to  the  health  and  comfort  of  the  body,  we  cannot  but  ad- 
mire the  wisdom  and  characteristic  goodness  of  the  Au- 
thor of  our  religion,  in  so  graduating  his  command, 
touching  the  mode  of  baptism,  as  to  make  it  harmonize 
with  the  various  conditions  of  his  great  family.  If  there- 
fore, it  should  be  found  upon  examination,  that  the  apos- 
tolic churches  did  practise  immersion,  still  that  circum- 
stance can  be  sufficiently  accounted  for  on  other  ground 
than  that  of  a  specific  command  of  Christ. 

It  would  be  an  easy  matter  to  extend  our  remarks  on 
this  subject  to  an  indefinite  length;  we  might  advert  to 
the  several  benefits  of  baptism,  as  set  forth  in  Part  II. 
of  this  work,  and  show  by  the  strongest  evidence  of 
which  the  subject  is  susceptible,  that  all  those  benefits 
are  enjoyed,  to  say  the  least,  in  as  ample  and  rich  a  meas- 
ure by  Christians  baptized  by  affusion,  as  by  those  who 
have  received  the  ordinance  in  any  other  Avay ;  and  justly 
infer  from  this  fact,  that  the  mode  cannot  be  essential. 
We  might  take  another  view  of  the  holy  supper,  and 
prove,  that  as  the  eating  and  drinking  of  a  given  quantity 
of  bread  and  wine  by  each  communicant,  is  not  indispen- 
sable to  a  valid  reception  of  this  sacrament,  so  it  is  pre- 
posterous to  set  up  such  a  pretension  in  reference  to  bap- 
tism ;  that  bread  and  wine  occupy  the  same  place  in  the 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  269 

one  that  water  does  in  the  other ;  all  are  outward  signs 
and  so  far  as  quantity  is  concerned,  mere  circumstances. 
It  is  the  command  and  promise  of  our  Lord  annexed  to 
the  signs  or  emblems,  and  our  faith  in  the  same,  that 
constitute  them  sacraments,  and  apart  from  that  command 
and  promise,  these  emblems,  whether  used  in  greater  or 
smaller  quantity,  cannot  possibly  partake  of  a  sacrament- 
al character.  Hence  the  great  Saxon  Reformer  justly 
remarks  on  baptism  :  "  It  is  not  the  water  that  produces 
the  benefits,  but  the  word  of  God  which  is  connected 
with  the  water,  and  our  faith  confiding  in  the  word  of 
God  in  this  baptismal  water.  For  without  the  ivord  of 
God  the  ivater  is  mere  water,  but  ivith  the  ivord  of  God, 
it  is  a  baptism."^ 

We  might  yet  further  refer  to  the  ceremony  of  "  feet 
washing"  as  practised  by  several  sects,  in  literal  con- 
formity to  the  command  and  example  of  Christ,  and 
show  that  as  the  Baptists  dispense  with  a  literal 
observance  of  it,  and  are  content  with  obeying  it  virtual- 
ly ;  (that  is,  with  performing  acts  of  condescension  and 
brotherly  kindness  ;)  and  to  justify  themselves,  plead 
the  difference  of  present  usages  from  ancient  ones, 
and  the  sufficiency  of  complying  with  the  spirit  in- 
stead of  the  letter  of  it ;  therefore  they  themselves  con- 
firm us  by  their  own  procedure  in  the  belief,  that  outward 
forms  and  modes  are  of  little  weight  in  religious  ordi- 
nances. We  would  not  be  understood  to  maintain,  that  the 
construction  put  upon  the  command  of  Christ  to  ivash 
one  another'' s  feet,  and  their  justification  of  that  construc- 
tion on  the  ground  of  the  changes  which  have  taken 
place  in  the  usages  and  circumstances  of  society,  and 
their  conforming  therefore  to  the  spirit  instead  of  the 

'See  Luther's  Catechism,  fourth  part,  fifth  question. 
23* 


270  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

mere  letter  of  that  command,  are  improper.  Far  from 
it ;  the  principles  on  which  they  proceed,  in  all  this,  we 
believe  to  be  decidedly  correct.  But  on  the  very  same 
principles  we  are  fully  sustained  in  the  view,  that  the 
outward  mode  of  baptism  is  not  essential,  and  even  if  it 
could  be  certainly  determined  that  this  sacrament  was  at 
first  administered  by  submersion,  we  should  not  be  bound 
to  conform  to  that  practice.  But  we  forbear  ;  we  think 
the  proposition  with  which  we  commenced  this  branch 
of  the  subject,  has  been  fully  sustained  and  hence  we 
shall  hasten  to  the  last  proposition. 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

The  third  and  last  proposition  respecting  baptism  that 
we  intend  to  consider,  is  the  following : 

III.  Is  the  mode  hy  affusion  decidedly  more  scriptu- 
ral, appropriate  and  edifying  than  that  by  submersion? 

Without  stopping  to  analyse  this  proposition,  we  shall 
proceed  at  once  to  state  the  grounds  upon  which  in  a 
general  view,  we  answer  it  in  the  affirmative. 

We  maintain  that  the  mode  by  afTusion  is  decidedly 
more  scriptural,  appropriate  and  edifying  than  that  by 
submersion : — 

1.  Because  it  falls  in  'more  harmoniously  ivith  the 
circumstances  attending  the  several  exainples  of  baptism 
recorded  in  the  New  Testament.  We  have  already  seen 
that  there  is  not  one  word,  not  one  incident,  not  even  a 
hint  to  be  found  in  the  various  cases  of  baptism  narrated 
in  the  New  Testament,  which  proves  that  submersion 
was  practised  ;  even  the  ordinance  as  administered  to  the 
disciples  of  John,  to  our  Saviour  and  to  the  Ethiopian 
eunuch  does  not  bring  to  light  a  single  circumstance 
which  may  not  be  most  happily  reconciled  with  the  idea 
of  affusion.  But  can  the  same  be  said  on  the  other  side 
of  the  question  ?  Think  of  the  baptism  of  Saul  of  Tar- 
sus, of  the  three  thousand  converts  on  the  day  of  Pente- 
cost, of  Cornelius  and  his  household,  of  the  jailor,  of 
Lydia,  of  the  disciples  in  Samaria,  Acts  viii.  16,  &c.,  and 
let  any  unprejudiced  mind  decide,  Avhether  the  circum- 
stances detailed  in  connection  with  these  cases  are  not 


272  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

absolutely  in  conflict  with  the  doctrine  of  plunging,  unless 
violence  is  done  to  the  text,  or  some  far-fetched  and  fan- 
ciful interpretation  is  forced  upon  it.  We  do  not  aver 
that  it  is  plainly  asserted  in  totidem  verbis  that  the 
above  individuals  were  baptized  by  pouring  or  sprinkling, 
but  we  do  say  that  all  the  circumstances  combined,  pre- 
sent such  an  overwhelming  array  of  argument  as  not  to 
leave  a  solitary  loop  on  which  to  hang  a  reasonable  doubt. 
Admit  that  they  received  the  ordidance  by  affusion,  and 
all  is  plain  and  intelligible ;  every  circumstance  mentioned 
accords  with  and  corroborates  the  idea,  there  is  nothing 
to  perplex  the  plain  reader,  nothing  but  what  is  easily 
accounted  for.  But  assume  the  theory  of  submersion, 
and  that  moment  you  are  met  at  every  step  with  difficult- 
ies and  involved  in  an  inextricable  labyrinth  of  incon- 
gruities. We  have  already  pointed  out  those  embarrassing 
circumstances,  and  shall  not  travel  over  the  same  ground 
again ;  it  is  sufficient  for  our  present  purpose  simply  to 
refer  to  them.  But  we  would  not  intimate,  that  because 
the  circumstances  alluded  to,  are,  according  to  the  estab- 
lished laws  of  exegesis,  irreconcilable  with  submersion 
and  fall  in  so  harmoniously  with  afl'usion,  therefore  affii- 
sion  is  the  only  valid  mode.  We  have  already  proved 
that  the  mode  is  not  essential ;  that  apostolic  example 
itself,  unattended  by  a  command,  is  not  binding,  and  when 
even  enforced  by  an  injunction  cannot  justly  be  made  to 
extend  to  accidents  or  mere  matters  in  themselves  indif- 
ferent; but  what  v/e  mean  is,  that  though  affusion  be  not 
the  only  scriptural  mode,  yet  being  more  consonant  with 
the  example  of  the  apostles  as  transmitted  to  us  in  the 
scriptures,  it  is  therefore  7no7'e  scriptural  than  submer- 
sion. There  are  different  degrees  of  assimilation  to 
complete  conformity  to  primitive  example   even  in  the 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  273 

externals  of  religion,  and  in  proportion  as  our  mode  ap- 
proximates nearer  to  that  kind  of  conformity,  it  may  be 
said  to  be  more  perfectly  in  accordance  with  Scripture. 

2.  Again.,  affusion  is  more  scriptural  and  appropri- 
ate because  it  is  the  fittest  emblem  of  the  blessings  in- 
tended to  be  represented  by  baptism.  It  will  be  admitted 
that  these  blessings  are  mainly  the  forgiveness  of  sin 
through  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  the  sanctifying  influences 
of  the  Holy  Spirit.  These  were  the  benefits  represented 
by  cii'cumcision ;  the  apostle  tells  us  it  signified  "the 
putting  off  the  body  of  the  sins  of  the  flesh,'"  and  "  the 
circumcision  of  the  heart,  in  the  spirit  and  not  in  the  let- 
ter."^ Clarke's  comment  on  the  latter  quotation  reads 
thus  :  "  Circumcision  was  a  rite  which  represented  a 
spiritual  thing,  viz.  the  change  and  purification  of  the 
heart,  as  may  be  seen  Jer.  iv.  4  and  ix.  26;  Ezek.  xliv. 
7 — 9.  Thus  also  baptism  symbolically  sets  forth  the 
remission  of  sin  by  the  blood  of  atonement,  and  the  pu- 
rification of  our  nature  by  the  operations  of  God's  Spirit. 

Now  in  order  to  prove  that  affusion  is  a  more  scriptu- 
ral and  appropriate  emblem  of  these  'gifts,  it  is  only  ne- 
cessary to  inquire  how  the  shedding  of  Christ's  blood, 
which  is  the  meritorious  ground  of  pardon,  and  the  pour- 
ing out  of  the  Spirit,  which  is  the  efficient  cause  of 
sanctification,  are  represented  in  the  word  of  God.  In 
recurring  to  the  ceremonies  of  the  Mosaic  law,  we  find 
that  the  pardoning  efficacy  of  Christ's  sacrifice  on  the 
cross  was  prefigured,  not  hy  plunging,  but  by  sprinkling, 
Exod.  xxix.  21,  Lev.  vii.  14  and  xiv.  7,  Numb.  viii.  7 
and  xix.  18 — 19,  Isa.  lii.  15,  Heb.  ix.  13 — 14  and  xii. 
24,  1  Peter  i.  2.  In  all  these  passages  and  many  others 
that  might  be  referred  to,  the  act  of  sprinkling  is  uni- 

'Col.  ii.  11.  mom.  ii.  29. 


274  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

fornily  employed  as  an  emblem  of  the  shedding  of  Christ's 
blood  for  the  forgiveness  of  sin ;  plunging  is  not  once 
dreamed  of;  so  also,  when  the  inspired  writers  speak  of 
imparting  the  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  for  the  sancti- 
fication  of  our  nature,  the  idea  is  almost  universally  ex- 
pressed by  sprinMing  and  pouring.  Isa.  xxxii.  15  and 
Ixiv.  3,  Ezek.  xxxvi,  25 — 26  and  xxxix.  29,  Joel  ii. 
28—29,  Zeeh.  xii.  10,  Acts  ii.  17—18  and  x.  45,  We 
might  increase  this  list  of  references,  but  it  is  already 
sufficiently  long.  Now  if  the  reader  will  turn  to  them, 
he  will  find  that  pouring  and  sprinkling  are  throughout, 
the  terms  used  to  designate  the  communication  of  the  in- 
fluences of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  the  efficient  means  of  the 
renovation  and  purification  of  our  nature  ;  indeed,  the 
phrases :  " I  will poitr  my  Spirit  upon  thy  seed ;"  "I  will 
sprinkle  clean  water  upon  you,"  &c.,  seem  to  be  the 
favorite  language  of  inspiration  whenever  the  subject  is 
introduced.  Moreover,  the  psalmist  and  the  prophet 
Hosea  represent  those  same  divine  influences  under  the 
similitude  of  rain,  in  which  the  earth,  it  is  well  known,  is 
not  plunged,  but  which  descends  in  drops  and  sprinkles 
the  earth.     Ps.  Ixxii.  6,  Hos.  vi.  3. 

Who  then  does  not  plainly  see  that  affusion  is  a  de- 
cidedly more  scriptural  and  appropriate  representation  of 
the  blessings  symbolized  by  baptism,  than  submersioji  ? 
and  hence  we  willingly  leave  the  reader  to  make  his  own 
deduction  as  to  the  most  scriptural  and  appropriate  form 
of  baptism. 

But  we  have  not  yet  disposed  of  this  view  of  the  sub- 
ject. The  "baptism  of  the  Spirit"  was  promised  by  our 
Lord  to  his  disciples,  it  had  been  predicted  by  the  pro- 
phets of  old,  especially  by  Joel,  ch.  ii.  v.  28 — 29.  "I 
will  j30wr  out  my  Spirit  upon  all  flesh,"  &c. ;  and  on  the 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  275 

day  of  Pentecost  especially,  and  also  on  subsequent  occa- 
sions, this  promise  was  fulfilled.  But  hoiv,  in  what  man- 
ner did  the  fulfilment  take  place?  was  it  by  submersion? 
were  the  aposdes /j/«?j^erf  into  the  Holy  Ghost?  By  no 
means ;  the  very  thought  is  preposterous.  Turn  to  the 
first  four  verses  of  the  second  chapter  of  Acts,  and  you 
Avill  find  an  account  of  the  descent  of  the  Spirit;  but  not 
a  word  about  plunging,  nor  even  a  circumstance  that  could 
possibly  call  up  such  an  idea ;  bvit  as  a  gentle  rain  de- 
scends upon  the  verdant  fields,  so,  we  read,  the  Spirit 
was  poured  out  in  the  form  of  cloven  tongues,  "■and  it 
sat  upon  each  of  t/iem.''^  On  another  occasion  we  are 
taught  more  distinctly  wliat  was  the  mode  of  this  baptism 
of  the  Spirit  on  the  day  of  Pentecost.  When  Peter 
preached  in  the  house  of  Cornelius,  the  Spirit  descended 
on  all  who  heard  him,  and  in  relating  the  occurrence  he 
says,  "  the  Holy  Ghost  fell  on  them  as  on  us  at  the  be- 
ginning, (that  is,  at  the  beginning  of  the  new  economy 
on  the  day  of  Pentecost.)  Then  remembered  I  the  words 
of  the  Lord,  how  he  said  John  indeed  baptized  with 
water;  but  ye  shall  be  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost.'" 
Now  we  demand  a  candid  answer  to  the  question;  did 
this  baptism  consist  in  plunging  the  disciples  into  the 
Holy  Ghost?  or  did  it  consist  in  pouring  out  the  Holy 
Ghost  upon  them?  in  a  word,  was  it  a  baptism  by  sub- 
mersion, or  by  affusion? 

We  feel  warranted  then,  in  declaring  once  more,  that 
affusion  being  decidedly  more  significant  of  tire  benefits 
intended  to  be  represented,  is  far  more  scriptural  and  ap- 
propriate, and  for  this  reason  alone,  vastly  preferable  to 
submersion.  We  cannot  close  this  argument  better  than 
in  the  language  of  a  learned  cotemporary ;  "  Surely  it  is 

^Acts.  xi.  15—16. 


276  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

not  without  design  or  meaning,  that  we  find  language  of 
this  kind  so  generally,  I  almost  say,  so  uniformly  used. 
Can  a  single  instance  be  produced  from  the  word  of  God 
in  which  the  cleansing  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  are 
symbolized  by  dipping  or  plunging  into  w^ater,  or  into 
oil  or  blood  ?  Or  can  a  single  example  be  found  in  which 
believers  are  represented  as  being  dipped  or  plunged  into 
the  Holy  Ghost  ?  No  such  example  is  recollected. 
Whenever  the  inspired  writers  speak  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
being  imparted  to  the  children  of  men,  either  in  his  sanc- 
tifying power,  or  his  miraculous  gifts,  they  never  repre- 
sent the  benefit  under  the  figure  of  immersion  ;  but 
always,  unless  my  memory  deceives  me,  by  the  figures 
of  '  sprinkling,'  '  pouring  out,'  '  falling,'  or  '  resting 
upon'  from  on  high.  Now  if  baptism,  so  far  as  it  has  a 
symbolical  meaning,  is  intended  to  represent  the  cleansing 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  all  agree  ;  it  is  evident  that  no  mode 
of  applying  the  baptismal  water  can  be  more  strikingly 
adapted  to  convey  its  symbolical  meaning,  or  more 
strongly  expressive  of  the  great  benefit  which  the  ordi- 
nance is  intended  to  hold  forth  and  seal,  than  sprinkling 
or  pouring.  Nay,  is  it  not  manifest  that  this  mode  of 
administering  the  ordinance,  is  far  more  in  accordance 
with  Bible  language,  and  Bible  allusion,  than  any  other  ? 
Surely,  then,  baptism  by  sprinkling  or  affiision,  would 
have  been  treated  with  less  scorn  by  our  Baptist  brethren, 
if  they  had  recollected  that  these  are  invariably,  the  fa- 
vorite figures  of  the  inspired  writers  when  they  speak  of 
the  richest  covenant  blessings  which  the  Spirit  of  God 
imparts  to  his  beloved  people.  Surely  all  attempts  to 
turn  this  mode  of  applying  the  sacramental  water  in  bap- 
tism into  ridicule,  is  really  nothing  less  than  shameless 
ridicule  of  die  statements  and  the  language  of  God's  own 
word?" 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

3.   Tlie  practice  of  baptizing  by  affusion  is  decidedly 
more  scriptural  and  appropriate  than  that  by  submer- 
sion, because  it  alone  is  adapted  to  the  designed  uni- 
versality of  the  Christian  religion. — Those  who   are 
acquainted   with   the   prophecies  of  the   Old  and  New 
Testament,  know  that  the  church  of  God  is   destined 
ultimately   to   comprehend  the  whole   world.      We  are 
assured  that  "the  wilderness  and  the  solitary  place  shall 
be  glad,  and  the  desert  shall  rejoice,  and  blossom  as  the 
rose  ;"^  the  Father  has  engaged  to  give  to  the  Son  "  the 
heathen  for  his  inheritance,  and  the   uttermost  parts  of 
the  earth  for  his  possession;""  Christ  himself  has  de- 
clared that  "  this  gospel  of  the  kingdom  shall  be  preached 
in  all  the  world,  for  a  witness  unto  all  nations."^     The 
very  nature  of  the  Christian  religion,  as  well  as  the  uni- 
versal benevolence  of  its  divine  Author,  the  provision 
made  for  its   complete  diffusion,  and  the   command  to 
prosecute  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  until  "  the  end  of 
the  world;"  are  so  many  pledges  that  the  period  must 
finally  arrive  when  the  standard  of  the  cross  shall  be  victo- 
riously planted  on  all  the  isles  of  the  sea,  and  its  banner 
float  in  triumph  in  every  climate.     Then  the  remotest 
inhabitants  of  the  polar  regions  as  well  as  those  of  the 
torrid  zone  ;  the  wandering  tribes  of  the  arid  desert  and 

'Isa.  XXXV.  1-         -Ps.  ii.  8. 

^jflatt.  xxiv.  14.     See  also  Ps.  Ix.xii.  8 — 11.     Isa.  ii.  2.     Dan.  ii. 
34—35.     Mai.  i.  11.     Rev.  xi.  15  and  xx.  2 — 3,  &c. 
24 


278  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

those  who  dwell  in  the  frigid  vicinity  of  ice-bound  streams 
and  snow-capt  mountains; — all  shall  be  brought  into 
willing  subjection  to  the  King  of  saints  ; — all,  all  shall  be 
numbered  amongst  his  baptized  hosts  and  joyfully  praise 
and  worship  him  as  their  common  Lord  and  Saviour. 
Blessed  Redeemer,  prosecute  thou  the  Avork  of  triumph, 
and  hasten  the  time  when  all  the  nations  and  kindred  of 
the  globe  shall  acknowledge  thy  authority  and  bow  to 
thy  sceptre. 

But  is  there  no  difficulty — no  invincible  obstacle  in 
the  way  of  Christ's  universal  reign,  on  the  supposition 
that  submersion  is  the  only  acceptable  mode  of  baptism  ^ 
How  are  the  people  to  be  plunged  in  those  large  and 
numerous  districts,  which  are  so  parched  and  dried  up 
that  neither  stream  nor  pool  is  to  be  found  for  many  miles 
together  ?  Would  not  the  trouble  and  expense  attending 
submersion,  whether  fountains  were  sought  for  or  baptis- 
teries were  formed,  render  it  impracticable  to  a  consider- 
able portion  of  the  community,  especially  if,  in  a  season 
of  gracious  visitation,  thousands  upon  thousands  should 
be  converted  in  a  day,  as  we  have  reason  to  expect  will 
be  the  case  prior  to  the  dawning  of  the  millenial  glory  ? 
And  is  the  difficulty  not  even  greater  in  the  extreme 
northern  regions,  where  darkness  and  unmitigated  winter 
reign  for  six  months  in  succession  ? — there  every  stream 
is  locked  up  in  icy  fetters  most  of  the  year  ;  the  cold  is 
intense  ;  the  solid  covering  of  the  frozen  deep  impregna- 
ble. What  labor  and  cost  in  such  countries  to  obtain  an 
opportunity  for  submersion ! — And  then  also,  there  are 
seasons  even  in  temperate  latitudes,  when  by  reason  of  a 
drought,  there  is  hardly  a  sufficient  quantity  of  water  to 
be  found  to  sustain  animal  life  ;  the  heavens  become  brass 
and  the  earth  iron,  and  the  Lord  makes  the  rain  of  the 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  279 

land  poivder  and  dust?  Now  how  is  submersion  to 
be  practised  at  such  times  ?  Must  it  be  delayed  until  the 
rains  of  heaven  pour  down  a  supply  of  the  liquid  element? 
But  in  the  mean  time  thousands  may  die,  and  if  submer- 
sion is  essential,  what  becomes  of  them  ?  Dr.  Austin 
speaks  to  the  same  effect  on  this  subject :  "  In  besieged 
cities,"  says  he,  "  where  there  are  thousands,  and  hun- 
dreds of  thousands  of  people  ;  in  sandy  deserts  like  those 
of  Africa,  Arabia,  and  Palestine  ;  in  the  northern  regions, 
where  the  streams,  if  there  be  any,  are  shut  up  with  im- 
penetrable ice ;  and  in  severe  and  extensive  droughts,  like 
that  which  took  place  in  the  time  of  Ahab ;  sufficiency  of 
water  for  animal  subsistence  is  scarcely  to  be  procured. 
Now,  suppose  God  should,  according  to  his  predictions, 
pour  out  plentiful  effusions  of  his  Spirit,  so  that  all  the 
inhabitants  of  one  of  these  regions  or  cities,  should  be 
born  in  a  day.  Upon  the  Baptist  hypothesis,  there  is  an 
absolute  impossibility  that  they  should  be  baptized,  while 
there  is  this  scarcity  of  water ;  and  this  may  last  as  long 
as  they  live."  In  addition  to  all  this,  how  can  we  safely 
plunge  infirm,  diseased  and  dying  persons,  especially  in 
those  extreme  northern  climates  ?  Let  us  suppose  a  per- 
son to  be  converted  on  a  bed  of  sickness  ;  he  is  extremely 
feeble;  not  able  to  lift  his  head  from  his  pillow;  his 
recovery  depends,  under  God,  on  quiet  and  composure, 
and  especially  on  being  carefully  protected  from  all  expo- 
sure to  cold  and  humidity.  This  is  by  no  means  an  im- 
probable or  even  a  rare  case.  He  is  persuaded  that  every 
mode  of  baptism  except  by  submersion,  is  a  nulUty ;  of 
course  he  is  taken  from  his  bed  and  "  buried  in  a  watery 
grave,"  and  without  a  miracle,  this  is  the  precursor  of 

'Deut.  xxviii.  23 — 24. 


280  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

his  actual  interment  in  the  earth,  particularly  if  the  cere- 
mony is  performed  in  a  high  northern  latitude  or  in  the 
dead  of  winter.  Here  then  Ave  have  a  case  of  self-immo- 
lation at  the  shrine  of  mistaken  zeal,  and  to  the  mere 
outward  form  of  a  religious  rite  !  And  if  the  minister 
who  performs  the  rite,  is  old  and  infirm,  he  may  also  fall  a 
victim  to  the  desperate  operation.  Certainly,  Baptist  min- 
isters whose  health  is  impaired  and  who  have  grown  feeble, 
can  in  no  case  baptize  with  safety ;  and  if  called  on  to 
submerse  large  and  corpulent  men,  they  cannot  comply 
without  endanfferinff  their  life. 

Now,  is  a  religion  that  dictates  a  course  so  merciless 
as  this  ; — a  religion  which  imposes  impossibilities, — re- 
quiring submersion  in  districts  of  country  and  in  seasons 
in  which  it  is  utterly  impracticable  ; — a  religion  that  de- 
mands compliance  Avith  an  external  form,  which  even  in 
the  temperate  zone,  in  some  cases,  insures  the  martyrdom 
of  its  votary  ; — is  such  a  religion  adapted  to  universal 
diflusion  ?  is  it  calculated  to  prevail  Avithout  a  rival  to  the 
utmost  limits  and  in  all  the  ends  of  the  earlh  ?  "  It  is  a 
general  principle,  on  Avhich  the  defenders  of  Christianity 
often  and  justly  insist,  that  it  differs  materially,  not  only 
from  every  false  religion  but  even  from  the  temporary 
and  local  Mosaic  institutions,  in  this  circumstance,  that 
while  none  of  the  latter  Avere  adapted  in  their  ceremonies 
and  requisitions  to  all  individuals  in  every  nation,  the 
Christian  religion,  on  the  contrary,  is  suited  to  every  in- 
dividual of  every  nation,  in  every  age.  It  Avas  designed 
to  embrace  all  nations,  and  continue  to  the  end  of  the 
world.  Its  ordinances  or  outward  rites,  if  they  Avere  to 
correspond  with  this  design,  must  necessarily  be  fcAv  in 
number,  and  so  framed,  that  they  could  at  all  times  be 
administered  to  all  persons."     But  Avho  Avill  maintain 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  281 

that  baptism  by  submersion  is  a  rite  which  may  be  ad- 
ministered "at  all  times  and  to  all  persons  ?" 

It  accordingly  appears  to  us,  that  our  Baptist  brethren 
must  either  change  their  views  on  baptism  or  abandon 
the  hope  of  beholding  the  universal  reign  of  Christ  on 
earth.  Should  they  adopt  the  principle  that  impractica- 
bility absolves  from  duty,  then  the  question  presents  itself 
in  another  and  equall)^  suspicious  aspect,  viz.  is  it  credi- 
ble that  a  religion  designed  for  the  whole  world,  would 
be  encumbered  by  its  divine  Author  with  an  external  ob- 
servance necessarily  involving  in  numerous  cases,  absolute 
impossibility  ?  We  leave  our  opponents  to  take  which 
horn  of  the  dilemma  they  choose. 

"  Now,  contrast  all  these  difficulties,  which  surely, 
form  a  mass  of  no  small  magnitude  with  the  entire  absence 
of  every  difficulty  of  baptizing  by  sprinkling  or  affusion. 
According  to  our  plan,  which,  we  have  no  doubt,  is  by  far 
the  most  scriptural  and  edifying,  baptism  may  be  per- 
formed with  equal  ease  and  convenience  in  all  countries  ; 
at  all  seasons  of  the  year ;  in  all  situations  of  health  or 
sickness  ;  Avith  equal  safety  by  all  ministers,  whether 
young  or  old,  athletic  or  feeble ;  and  in  all  circumstances 
that  can  well  be  conceived.  How  admirably  does  this 
accord  with  the  gospel  economy,  which  is  not  intended 
to  be  confined  to  any  one  people,  or  to  any  particular 
climate  ;  but  is  equally  adapted,  in  all  its  principles,  and 
in  all  its  rites  to  every  "kindred,  and  people,  and  nation, 
and  tongue !" 

"  Accordingly,  it  is  a  notorious  fact,  that,  in  considera- 
tion of  the  difficulties  which  have  been  mentioned  as  at- 
tending immersion,  a  large  body  of  Baptists,  in  Holland, 
I  mean  the  Mennonites,  who  were  once  warm  and  un- 
compromising contenders  for  this  mode  of  administering 
24* 


282  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

baptism,  at  length  gave  it  up,  and,  while  they  still  baptize 
none  but  adults,  have  been,  for  more  than  a  hundred 
years,  in  the  practice  of  pouring  water  on  the  head  of  the 
candidate,  through  the  hand  of  the  administrator.  They 
found  that  when  candidates  for  baptism  were  lying  on 
sick  beds  ;  or  confined  in  prison  ;  or  in  a  state  of  pecu- 
liarly delicate  health  ;  or  in  various  other  unusual  situa- 
tions, which  may  be  easily  imagined ;  there  was  so  much 
difficulty,  not  to  say,  in  some  cases,  a  total  impossibility 
in  baptizing  by  plunging,  that  they  deliberately,  as  a  de- 
nomination, after  the  death  of  their  first  leader,  agreed  to 
lay  aside,  as  I  said,  the  practice  of  immersion  and  substi- 
tuted the  plan  of  affusion."' 

In  conclusion,  we  appeal  to  every  candid  reader, 
whether  the  doctrine  of  submersion  does  not  interpose 
very  serious  if  not  insurmountable  barriers  to  the  designed 
universal  spread  of  the  Christian  religion  ?  But  is  this 
the  case  with  effusion  ?  Does  it  thus  clog  the  onward 
progress  of  the  gospel  chariot  ?  Is  it  not  entirely  com- 
patible with  the  perfect  establishment  of  the  church  of 
God  in  every  climate,  in  every  region,  in  every  season, 
on  every  occasion,  and  among  every  people,  kindred  and 
tongue,  and  is  it  not  therefore  decidedly  more  scriptural, 
appropriate  and  edifying? 

'Dr.  Miller  on  Baptism, 


CHAPTER  XX. 

4.  Baptism  by  pouring  is  more  consistent  with  the 
simplicity  and  sjnritnality  of  the  gospel  than  plunging. 
Simplicity  and  spirituality  are  distinctive  features  of  the 
Christian  scheme.  It  claims  to  be  free  from  inconvenient 
and  oppressive  rites,  and  to  impose  no  yoke  that  is  not 
easy,  and  no  burden  which  is  not  light.  When  our  Lord 
told  the  Jews,  that  the  truth  should  make  them  free,^  he 
no  doubt  alluded  to  deliverance  from  the  numerous  and 
burdensome  requisitions  of  the  Mosaic  ritual,  as  well  as 
from  the  bondage  of  sin,  which  the  gospel  was  intended 
to  confer  upon  them,  and  when  he  promised  rest  to  them 
who  labored  and  were  heavy  laden,-  he  referred  among 
others,  to  those  also  who  were  heavy  laden  with  the 
cumbrous  rites  of  the  Mosaic  institution,  rendered  still 
more  oppressive  by  the  additions  made  by  the  scribes  and 
Pharisees  f  such  were  promised  rest  from  these  heavy 
burdens.  And  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  gospel  was 
intended  to  afford  them  this  rest,  our  Lord  could  emphat- 
ically say :  "  My  yoke  is  easy  and  my  burden  is  light." 
In  reference  to  the  same  fact  the  apostle  informs  us  that 
Christ  "  hath  blotted  out  the  hand-writing  of  ordinances 
that  was  against  us  *  *  *  nailing  it  to  his  cross. "^  But 
if  in  lieu  of  these  irksome  ordinances  the  gospel  imposes 
the  yoke  of  submersion, — the  frequently  painful  and 
dangerous,  and  not  seldom  impracticable  burden  of  total 

iJolmviii.  32.        ^^att.  xi.  28.       ^Ib.  xxiii.  4.        '«2  Col.  ii.  14. 


284  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

plunging,  where  is  the  ecclesiastical/rcerfoTJi?— where  the 
rest  from  ritual  pressure,  guarantied  by  the  Master  ? 

If  we  call  to  mind  all  the  difficulties  detailed  in  the 
preceding  argument,  it  will  be  found  that  the  whole  con- 
geries of  Mosaic  ceremonies  cannot  aftbrd  a  rite  so  incon- 
venient and  burdensome,  so  painful  and  destructive  to 
health,  as  is  submersion  under  some  circumstances  and 
in  some  climates  and  seasons,  and  hence,  hundreds 
submit  to  it  only  because  they  think  God  peremptorily 
requires  it. 

It  may  accordingly  with  very  just  grounds  be  ques- 
tioned, whether  all  this  coincides  with  the  admitted  sim- 
plicity and  spirituality  of  the  gospel ;  and  comports  with 
Christ's  promise  of  freedom  and  rest  from  ritual  burdens, 
and  the  declaration  that  his  yoke  is  easy  and  his  burden 
light.  No  part  of  this  objection  lies  against  affusion, 
and  hence  we  hold  it  to  be  more  scriptural  and  appropri- 
ate and  edifying. 


CHAPTER  XXI. 

5.  Our  mode  of  baptism  is  more  scriptural,  edifying 
and  appropriate,  because  it  is  not  calculated,  like  the 
doctrine  of  submersion,  to  give  rise  to  any  thing  that 
is  indecorous  or  indecent. — We  engage  in  this  part  of 
the  discussion  with  no  small  degree  of  reluctance,  because 
we  are  conscious  of  the  difficulty  of  enlarging  on  it,  with- 
out ourselves  transcending  the  limits  of  strict  propriety, 
and  giving  offence  to  those  whose  views  we  oppose.  We 
desire  however  to  avoid  both,  and  shall  go  no  further 
than  fidelity  to  our  subject  seems  to  demand. 

Whether  the  baptism  of  females,  in  the  presence  of  an 
assembled  and  mixed  multitude,  comprehending  all  de- 
scriptions of  character  and  condition,  can  be  conducted 
in  such  a  manner  as  not  to  infringe  upon  the  laws  of  del- 
icacy and  propriety,  we  willingly  submit  to  the  decision 
of  others.  Certainly,  there  are  thousands  Avho  think  that 
tlie  practice  is  not  in  strict  keeping  with  those  religious 
feelings  which  should  characterize  a  Christian  ordinance, 
nor  with  that  rigid  sense  of  decorum  Avhich  it  is  especial- 
ly desirable  that  the  more  delicate  sex  should  ever  cher- 
ish. Witness  the  hurried,  convulsive  respiration  of  the 
fair  candidate;  her  stifled  sigh;  the  violent  palpitation; 
the  alarm  depicted  upon  the  pale  visage ;  her  spasmodic 
grasp  on  the  arm  of  the  minister.  Do  these  symptoms 
afford  evidence  that  the  mind  is  occupied  with  the  devo- 
tional solemnities  of  religion  ?  See  her  emerging  from 
the  "  watery  grave,"  her  countenance  betokening  more 


286  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

of  sorrow  and  alarm  than  of  joy  and  confidence ;  her 
apparel  thoroughly  drenched  and  dripping,  and  cleaving 
to  her  body,  and  she,  as  if  prompted  by  an  instinctive 
feeling  of  indelicate  exposure,  anxious  to  escape  as  soon 
as  possible  the  scrutinizing  gaze  of  the  multitude.  Turn 
next  to  the  throngs  of  spectators,  among  whom  are  many 
vain  and  ungodly  men,  collected  for  the  express  purpose 
of  beholding  and  amusing  themselves  with  the  very  scene 
which  has  just  transpired.  What  profane  ribaldry  among 
that  gloating  rabble  ;  what  flippant  remarks  ;  impure  in- 
uendoes  and  frivolous  sentiments  !  Scenes  of  this  sort 
have  too  often  occurred;  and  more  than  once,  while  a 
few  pious  souls  have  prayerfully  waited  at  the  water's 
brink,  curses  from  the  wicked  have  floated  all  around, 
and  tainted  the  very  atmosphere !  We  make  these  state- 
ments, not  in  ridicule,  but  in  unaffected  sorrow  ;  God 
forbid  that  we  should  speak  lightly  of  a  sacred  ordi- 
nance !  Nor  do  we  ofler  this  consideration  as  an  argu- 
ment against  submersion  in  the  abstract,  but  simply  as  an 
evidence  of  its  tendency  to  indecorum, — we  will  not  add, 
indecency.  Such  repulsive  scenes  are  never  known  to 
be  associated  with  our  mode  of  administering  the  ordi- 
nance ;  and  this  is  another  reason  why  we  greatly  prefer 
it.  Can  any  other  case  be  conceived  in  which  right  and 
wrong  are  productive  of  such  paradoxical  results  ? 

Again,  it  is  well  known  that  in  the  third  century, 
and  subsequently,  when  Cyprian,  Cyril,  Athanasius  and 
Chrysostom  lived,  the  candidate  for  baptism  was  divested 
of  every  thread  of  apparel ;  we  speak  advisedly  and  on 
good  authority,  and  wish  to  be  understood;  both  males 
and  females,  all  ages  and  conditions  were  submersed  in  a 
state  of  perfect  nudity.  This  fact  has  already  been  ad- 
verted to,  and  amply  proved ;  even  enlightened  Baptists 


MODE    OF   BAPTISM.  287 

do  not  dispute  it.'  This  outrage  on  all  decency  resulted 
from  the  practice  of  submersion,  and  seems,  in  some  de- 
gree, necessarily  to  stand  connected  with  that  practice. 
The  learned  Wall  says:  "they"  (the  submersionists) 
"thought  it  better  represented  the  putting  oft'  the  old 
man,  and  also  the  nakedness  of  Christ  on  the  cross. 
Moreover,  as  baptism  is  a  washing,  they  judged  it  should 
be  the  washing  of  the  body,  not  of  the  clothes."- — How 
natural  is  the  transition  from  the  doctrine  of  submersion, 
to  this  revolting  and  abominable  abuse.  "For  if  the  thing 
signified  be  the  cleansing  and  purifying  of  the  individual 
by  an  ablution  which  must  of  necessity  extend  to  the 
whole  person  ;  it  would  really  seem  that  performing  this 
ceremony,  divested  of  all  clothing,  is  essential  to  its  em- 
blematic meaning.  Who  ever  thought  of  covering  the 
hands  with  gloves  when  they  were  about  to  be  washed  ; 
or  expected  really  to  cleanse  them  through  such  a  cover- 
ing ?  No  wonder,  then,  Avhen  the  principle  began  to  find 
a  place  in  the  church,  that  the  submersion  of  every  part 
of  the  body  in  water,  that  the  literal  bathing  of  the  whole 
person  was  essential  both  to  the  expressiveness  and  the 
validity  of  the  emblematical  transaction;  no  wonder,  I 
say,  that  the  obvious  consequence  should  soon  be  admit- 
ted, that  the  whole  body  ought  to  be  uncovered,  as  never 
fails  to  be  the  case,  with  any  member  of  the  body  Avhich 
may  wish  to  be  successfully  cleansed  by  bathing.  And 
we  have  no  hesitation  in  saying,  that,  if  we  fully 
adopted  the  general  principle  of  our  Baptist  brethren  in 
relation  to  this  matter,  we  should  no  more  think,  of  sub- 
jecting the  body  to  that  process  which  must,  in  order  to 
its  validity,  be  strictly  emblematical  of  a  comidete  spirit- 
»See  p.  160—162.  nVall,  ch.  xv.  Part  ii. 


288  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

ual  bathing,  while  covered  with  clothes,  than  we  should 
think,  in  common  life,  of  washing  the  hands  or  the  feet, 
while  carefully  covered  with  the  articles  of  dress  with 
which  they  are  commonly  clothed.  Whereas,  if  the 
principle  of  Pedobaptists  on  this  subject  be  adopted,  then 
the  solemn  application  of  water  to  the  part  of  the  body 
which  is  an  epitome  of  the  whole  person,  and  which  is 
always,  as  a  matter  of  course,  uncovered,  is  amply  suffi- 
cient to  answer  every  purpose  both  of  emblem  and  of 
benefit. 

Besides,  let  me  appeal  to  our  Baptist  brethren,  by  ask- 
ing, if  they  verily  believe  that  the  primitive  and  apostolic 
mode  of  administering  baptism  was  by  immersion,  and 
that  this  immersion  was  performed  in  a  state  of  entire 
nakedness  ;  how  can  they  dare,  upon  their  principles,  to 
depart,  as  to  one  iota  from  that  mode  ?  Let  them  not  say, 
that  they  carefully  retain  the  substance,  the  essential 
characters  of  the  plan  of  immersion.  Very  tnie.  This 
is  our  plea ;  and  it  accords  very  well  with  what  we  con- 
sider as  the  correct  system ;  but  in  the  mouth  of  a  Bap- 
tist it  is  altogether  inadmissible.  The  institute  in  ques- 
tion is  a  "positive"  one;  and,  according  to  him,  we 
must  not  depart  one  jot  or  tittle  from  the  original  plan."' 

So  far  then  as  the  example  of  the  third,  fourth  and 
fifth  centuries  is  concerned,  and  so  far  as  our  opponents' 
view  of  the  symbolic  signification  of  baptism  is  correct, 
they  are  bound  to  continue  the  two  practices ;  immoral 
i,  and  outrageous  as  one  of  them  undoubtedly  is,  they  are 
inseparably  connected,  and  must  stand  or  fall  together ; 
— we  mean  of  course,  agreeably  to  the  testimony  of  his- 
tory subsequently  to  the  apostolic  age,  and  the  light  in 
which  submersion  is  represented. 

'See  Dr.  Miller. 


MODE    OF   BAPTISM.  289 

•  Now  can  a  pi'actice  which,  in  connection  with  such 
views,  tends  to  Buch  indecorum  and  indecency,  be  prefer- 
able to  that  which  has  never  been  known  thus  to  degen- 
erate, and  cannot  in  the  nature  of  things  eventuate  in 
such  results  ?  Is  not  baptism  by  aspersion  decidedly 
more  scriptural,  appropriate  and  edifying? 

6.  Affusion  is  the  most  scriptural  cmd  appropriate 
mode,  because  it  accords  better  icith  Peter^s  definition  of 
baptism.  The  apostle  tells  us  that  this  ordinance  is  "not 
the  putting  away  of  the  filth  of  the  flesh,  but  the  answer 
of  a  good  conscience  towards  God.'"  From  this  it  ap- 
pears, that  its  efficacy  does  not  depend  upon  the  quantity 
of  water  employed,  or  on  the  physical  influence  of  water 
in  cleansing  the  body,  but^japon  the  faithful  answer  (stip- 
ulation or  engagement)  of  a  determined  and  good  con- 
science to  believe  in  Christ,  and  be  entirely  devoted  to 
his  service.  It  is  in  this  sense  only  that  baptism  can  be 
regarded  as  partaking  of  a  saving  character ;  namely,  as 
being  the  sign  and  seal  of  a  covenant;  which  covenant, 
if  faithfully  kept,  will  certainly  issue  in  our  salvation 
through  the  merits  of  Christ.  Baptism  then,  has  no 
power  in  itself,  any  more  than  other  external  ordinances ; 
its  efficacy  proceeds  from  its  connection  with  God's 
word,  from  its  being  the  formal  recognition  and  ratifica- 
tion of  a  saving  covenant  through  Christ,  and  from  the 
influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost  making  it  eff'ectual.  The 
benefits  of  the  ordinance  have  accordingly,  no  connection 
with  the  operation  of  water  on  the  animal  frame,  but  are 
the  result  of  a  gracious  covenant  solemnly  sealed  in  a 
divine  ordinance,  which  ordinance  is  made  eflectual  by 
God's  blessing  upon  it.  And  as  the  Scriptures  have  no 
where  expressly  informed  us  of  the   precise   mode  in 

'1  Peter  iii.  21. 
25 


290  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

which  the  water  employed  shall  be  applied,  we  have  the 
best  grounds  to  infer,  that  our  mode  of  applying  it  (which 
is  not  intended  to  put  away  the  filth  of  the  body)  is  more 
significant  and  appropriate,  and  to  say  the  very  least, 
quite  as  likely  to  be  accompanied  by  the  divine  blessing. 
Undoubtedly  aspersion  accords  perfectly  with  the  apos- 
tle's definition,  and  in  our  opinion  the  doctrine  of  sub- 
mersion does  not,  but  seems  rather  decidedly  to  conflict 
with  it,  and  hence  we  judge  the  former  is  more  scrip- 
tural and  edifying. 

7.  ^fijfusion  is  preferable  because  there  is  no  tendency 
in  it  to  superstition  and  abuse,  as  there  is  in  the  doc- 
trine of  submersio7i.  The  tendency  here  alleged  has 
been  developed  in  different  ages  and  in  divers  ways.  It 
is  well  known  and  has  already  been  adverted  to,  that  a 
magic  power  was  ascribed  to  submersion,  by  those  who 
practised  it  at  an  early  period.  Submersion  was  put  in 
the  place  of  Christ's  atonement  and  supposed  to  effect 
the  remission  of  sins,  and  the  doctrine  was  taught  that 
sins  committed  afterwards  were  peculiarly  dangerous,'  if 
not  altogether  unpardonable,  unless  the  individual  died  a 
martyr.  Bretschneider  states  that  in  ordinary  cases,  it 
was  believed  that  if  a  man  sinned  after  he  had  been  sub- 
mersed, he  would  certainly  perish.^  Hence,  it  was 
deemed  advisable  to  delay  baptism,  and  it  was  delayed  in 
reference  to  infants  and  others  ;  and  some  of  the  most 
conspicuous  converts  postponed  it  until  death,  in  the  hope 
of  thus  making  their  salvation  certain.*  But  this  is  not 
the  only  superstition  connected  with  the  doctrine  of  sub- 
mersion.    Passing  by  various  other  points  that  have  a 

'See  History  of  Baptism,  p.  106,  &c. 
'Bretsclineider's  Dogmatic,  vol.  ii.  p.  697,  Bqq. 
*Rees'  Cyclopedia.     Art.  Baptism. 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  291 

Similar  bearing,  we  will  come  down  at  once  to  the  age 
in  which  we  live.  Do  not  many  Baptists  at  present  lay 
an  unwarranted  stress  on  the  practice  of  submersion  ? 
Do  they  not  dwell  with  peculiar  and  the  most  manifest 
fondness  and  complacency  on  the  idea  of  being  "  buried  un- 
der the  water,"  just  as  if  it  had  an  innate  and  saving  efficacy, 
a  sort  of  necromantic  power  to  change  and  renovate  the 
sinner,  and  as  if  those  who  submitted  to  it,  were  necessa- 
rily regenerated  Christians  ?  We  do  not  say  that  this  is  the 
belief  of  the  pious  and  enlightened  members  of  that  de- 
nomination ;  but  look  to  the  great  mass,  and  even  to  some 
of  their  ministers,  and  see  whether  they  do  not  positively 
seem  to  imagine  that  "  being  buried  under  the  water"  is 
the  great  turning  point,  the  mighty  lever  in  religion, 
whereby  men  are  transformed  into  living  Christians,  and 
all  is  made  secure  for  time  and  eternity  !  Thus,  submer- 
sion is  put  for  regeneration,  and  the  effect  of  the  water 
takes  the  place  of  the  efficacy  of  Christ's  blood.  Here 
we  have  another  abuse  arising  from  the  doctrine  of  sub- 
mersion. And  no  wonder  that  such  consequences  result. 
Just  witness  the  amazing  zeal  of  those  brethren  in  recom- 
mending submersion  ;  how  they  dwell  on  it,  magnify  it, 
hold  it  up  unceasingly  to  public  view,  and  represent  it  as 
the  great  distinguishing  mark  of  discipleship.  T7ie 
water,  the  water,  THE  WATER,  seems  to  be  "  the 
one  thing  needful."  Is  not  such  a  course  calculated  to 
lead  men  astray  and  to  betray  them  into  a  false  hope  ? 
We  all  know  how  prone  men  are  to  self-righteousness, 
how  anxious  to  build  on  their  own  doings,  and  rely  on 
works  of  outward  obedience  for  pardon  and  divine  favor. 
"  Whenever  therefore,  any  external  rite  becomes  the 
grand  distinction  of  a  sect,  and  the  object  of  something 
approaching  to  sectarian  idolatry,  we  may  be  sure  there 


292  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

exists  not  only  danger,  but  the  actual  commencement,  to 
some  extent,  of  that  superstitious  reliance,  whicli  he  who 
has  not  learned  to  fear,  '  knows  nothing  of  the  human 
heart  yet  as  he  ought  to  know.' 

"  That  this  suggestion  has  something  more  than  mere 
fancy  on  which  to  rest,  is  evident  from  facts  of  recent 
and  most  mournful  occurrence.  A  large  and  daily  in- 
creasing sect  has  arisen,  within  a  few  years,  in  the  bosom 
of  the  Baptist  denomination  which  maintains  the  delusive 
and  destructive  doctrine,  that  baptism  is  regeneration  ; 
that  no  man  can  be  regenerated  who  is  not  immersed  ; 
and  that  all,  without  exception,  who  have  a  historical 
faith,  and  are  immersed,  are  of  course,  in  a  state  of  salva- 
tion. This  pernicious  heresy,  so  contrary  to  the  plainest 
principles  and  facts  of  the  word  of  God,  and  so  manifestly 
adapted  to  destroy  the  souls  of  all  who  believe  it,  has 
been  propagated  to  a  melancholy  extent,  by  a  plausible, 
reckless,  and  impious  demagogue,  and  is  supposed  to 
embrace  one  half  of  the  Baptist  body  in  the  western 
country,  besides  many  in  the  east.  In  short,  the  Baptist 
churches,  in  large  districts  of  country,  are  so  rent  in 
pieces,  and  deluded  by  the  miserable  impostor  referred 
to,  that  their  prospects,  for  many  years  to  come,  are  not 
only  gloomy,  but,  without  a  special  interposition  of  the 
King  of  Zion  in  their  favor,  altogether  desperate. 

"  Now  we  maintain  that  this  wretched  delusion  is  by  no 
means  an  unnatural  result  of  the  doctrine  and  practice  of 
our  Baptist  brethren,  in  regard  to  the  baptismal  rite. 
Multitudes  of  them,  Ave  know,  reject  and  abhor  the  heresy 
in  question  as  much  as  any  of  us.  But  have  they  duly 
considered,  that  it  seems  naturally  to  have  grown  out  of 
their  own  theory  and  practice  in  regard  to  baptism  ;  their 
attaching  such  a  disproportioned  importance  to  the  mode 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  293 

of  administering  that  ordinance  ;  often,  very  often,  direct- 
ing the  attention  of  the  people  more  to  the  river  than  the 
cross  ;  exchiding  all  from  Christian  communion,  however 
pious,  who  have  not  been  immersed  ;  and  making  repre- 
sentations which,  whether  so  intended  or  not,  naturally 
lead  the  weak  and  the  uninformed  to  consider  immersion 
as  a  kind  of  talisman,  always  connected  with  a  saving 
blessing  ?  This,  we  sincerely  believe,  is  the  native  ten- 
dency of  the  doctrine  of  our  Baptist  brethren,  although 
they,  we  are  equally  confident,  neither  perceive  nor  admit 
tliis  to  be  the  case.  If  pious  Christians  who  have  not 
been  immersed  cannot  be  admitted  to  communion  in  the 
church  below,  there  would  seem  to  be  still  more  reason 
for  excluding  them  from  the  purer  church  above.  And 
so  far  as  this  principle  is  received  and  cherished,  though 
far  from  being  alike  mischievous  in  all  cases,  it  can 
scarcely  fail  of  predisposing  many  minds  in  favor  of  that 
awful  delusion,  by  which  we  have  reason  to  believe  that 
not  a  few,  under  its  higher  workings,  have  been  blinded, 
betrayed,  and  lost.'" 

'Dr.  Miller. 
25* 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

8.  Effusion  should  be  preferred  because  it  does  not, 
like  the  doctrine  of  submersion,  interfere  with  and 
destroy  devotional  feeling.  We  have  already  detailed 
some  of  the  revolting  and  agitating  occurrences  that  are 
wont  to  attend  the  act  of  plunging:^  but  this  particular 
aspect  of  the  subject  is  too  painful  to  be  further  enlarged 
upon.  We  must  however  be  permitted  to  present  it  in 
another  point  of  view.  How  often  has  the  doctrine  of 
submersion  been  obtruded  upon  the  people  in  seasons  of 
revival,  and  like  a  spiritual  upas,  spread  blight  and  death 
around  it  ? 

By  believing  and  earnest  prayer  the  portals  of  heaven 
were  opened,  and  by  faithful  preaching  the  Holy  Spirit 
melted  the  obdurate  hearts  of  sinners  into  deep  contrition 
and  prepared  them  for  the  reception  of  God's  richest 
blessings.  There  was  a  high  degree  of  holy  excitement 
among  saints  and  sinners  ;  the  former  were  strengthened 
in  the  inner  man  and  rejoiced  in  the  marvellous  doings 
of  God's  grace  ;  and  the  latter,  overwhelmed  with  a  pain- 
ful sense  of  their  moral  corruptions,  were  anxiously  in- 
quiring the  way  to  Zion.  From  day  to  day  sinners  found 
pardon  and  salvation  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb  and  were 
added  to  God's  ransomed  people  ;  Avliile  others,  and  yet 
others  were  apprehended  by  the  same  grace,  and  more 
than  supplied  their  place  in  the  class  of  the  anxious. 
Thus  the  work  of  mercy  progressed  in  great  power  and 

'See  p.  145,  sqq. 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  295 

love ;  the  incense  of  prayer  and  praise  daily  ascended, 
perfumed  with  "the  blood  of  sprinkling;"  God's  people 
sang  aloud  the  praises  of  the  Redeemer  in  unity  of  spirit 
and  in  the  bond  of  peace  ;  awakened  sinners  were  pointed, 
without  a  dissenting  voice,  to  the  Lovely  One  of  Calvary  ; 
there  was  nothing  to  divert  attention  from  the  great  lead- 
ing interests  that  alike  engrossed  the  minds  of  all ;  one 
feeling,  one  desire,  one  prayer,  one  spirit  animated  every 
bosom  ;  it  seemed  as  if  heaven  had  been  brought  down 
upon  earth,  or  as  if  the  millenial  glory  had  suddenly  burst 
upon  the  church ;  even  angels  looked  down  with  sympa- 
thetic delight,  and  joined  in  the  harmonious  chorus  of 
"  glory  to  God  in  the  highest." 

In  the  midst  of  these  hallowed  exercises  a  note  of  dis- 
cord is  unexpectedly  heard ;  a  gruff  and  grating  sound 
interrupts  and  mars  the  euphony  of  the  whole  scene. 
The  attention  of  all  is  arrested  ;  they  look  to  see  whence 
this  untimely  disturbance  proceeds,  and  behold  a  warm- 
hearted Baptist  brother  has  made  his  appearance  and  the 
air  trembles  beneath   the  sound  of  his  voice,  as  he  ex- 
claims, full  of  zeal  for  Jiis  favorite  doctrine,  "  The  river, 
the  river  !  you  must  all  be  'buried  under  the  water'  if  you 
wish  to  enter  tlie  kingdom  of  heaven  !"     Thus,  instead  of 
co-operating  with  his  brethren  with  all  his  heart,  to  bring 
sinners  to  Christ  and  promote  the  holiness  of  believers, 
he  labors  to  convince  them  that  baptism  should  not  be 
administered  by  sprinkling,  but  by  plungitig.      The 
consciences  of  the  weak  are  perplexed  ;  the  attention  of 
the  anxious  is  withdrawn  from  the  one  thing  needful  and 
directed  to  an  outward  ordinance  ;  believers  are  diverted 
from  the  great  work  before  thejn  and  involved  in  unpro- 
fitable and  baneful  discussions  ;  the  Holy  Spirit  is  grieved  ; 
God  is  provoked  to  put  a  stop  to  the  current  of  his  bless- 


296  INFANJ   BAPTISM. 

ings,  and  the  whole  scene  is  changed  into  one  of  dishar- 
mony, jealousy  and  unkind  debate.  Thus,  by  the  ill-fated 
obtrusion  of  the  doctrine  of  submersion, — oh  how  many 
a  good  work  has  been  thwarted  in  its  incipiency  or  ar- 
rested in  its  progress.  Such  ministers  or  Christians 
would  do  well  seriously  to  inquire,  whether  they  are 
pursuing  the  great  object  for  which  the  Son  of  God  died 
on  the  cross,  and  whether  they  are  not  in  danger  of  sub- 
stituting an  excessive  zeal  for  an  external  rite,  or  rather 
the  mere  form  of  such  a  rite,  in  the  place  of  pure  love 
to  Christ  and  to  immortal  souls  ?  "I  have  personally 
linown,"  says  a  writer,  "such  proceedings  to  occur  with 
a  frequency  as  wonderful  as  it  was  revolting ;  and  with 
an  obtrusive  zeal  worthy  of  a  better  cause.  Young  and 
timid  consciences  have  been  distressed,  if  not  with  the 
direct  assertion,  at  least  by  the  artful  insinuation,  that 
their  particular  mode  of  baptism  was  all  in  all ;  that  there 
could  be  no  safe  Christianity  without  it.  The  river,  the 
river,  really  seemed,  by  some,  to  be  placed  in  the  room 
of  the  Saviour! 

"  There  is  something  in  all  this  so  deeply  offensive  to 
every  enlightened  and  judicious  Christian,  which  in- 
volves so  much  meanness,  and  which  manifests  so  much 
more  concern  for  the  enlargement  of  a  sect,  than  the  sal- 
vation of  souls,  that  it  is  difficult  to  speak  of  it  in  terms 
of  as  strong  reprobation  as  it  deserves,  without  infringing 
on  the  limits  of  Christian  decorum  and  respectfulness. 
It  is  conduct  of  which  no  candid  and  generous  mind,  ac- 
tuated by  the  spirit  of  Christ,  will  ever  be  guilty.  And, 
I  am  happy  to  add,  it  is  conduct  in  which  many  belonging 
■to  the  denomination  to  which  I  allude,  have  souls  too 
enlarged  and  elevated  to  allow  themselves  to  indulge,'" 

'Dr.  Miller. 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  297 

Now  we  ask,  whether  the  doctrine  of  aspersion  is 
wont  in  this  wise,  to  interfere  Avith  devotion  and  with 
revivals  ?  Every  one  knows  that  such  is  not  the  case, 
and  cannot  in  the  nature  of  things  be  so  ;  to  attempt  to 
prove  this  would  be  a  Avork  of  supererogation,  because  it 
is  self-evident.  If  at  any  time  Pedobaptists  have  been 
forAvard  to  break  in  upon  the  devotion  of  Baptists,  or  to 
interfere  Avith  and  arrest  revivals  among  them,  by  broach- 
ing baptism  or  even  by  decrying  the  Baptist  mode  of  it, 
their  course  Avas  not  the  legitimate  result  of  their  system, 
but  rather  of  their  ignorance  or  sectarism.  But  the 
procedure  of  Baptists  in  such  cases,  is  in  accordance 
with  their  theory  ;  it  is  interAvoven  with  their  prescriptive 
view  of  the  subject  and  naturally  floAvs  from  that  vicAV. 
Therefore  Ave  greatly  prefer  aspersion  and  deem  it  to  be 
more  scriptural,  appropriate  and  edifying. 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 

9.  Affusion  does  not,  like  the  doctrine  of  submersion, 
logically  lead  to  such  glaring  absurdities.  If  the  doc- 
trine of  our  Baptist  brethren  be  correct,  conckisions  the 
most  preposterous,  at  which  they  themselves  probably 
recoil,  may  be  justly  deduced.  To  present  this  view  of 
the  subject  in  all  its  various  phases,  wovild  be  a  tedious 
task,  we  shall  therefore  be  content  with  a  single  argument. 

According  to  the  Baptist  theory  no  one  is  baptized  or 
has  a  right  to  administer  baptism,  who  has  not  been  sub- 
mersed ;  but  if  the  testimony  of  authentic  ecclesiastical 
history  may  be  relied  on,  there  was  a  period  in  the  church 
(commencing  in  the  fifth  and  concluding  in  the  twelfth 
century)  when  no  society  of  Christians  was  known  to 
confine  the  ordinance  to  adults,  or  even  pretended  to 
teach  that  it  was  unlawful  to  baptize  infants.  Besides, 
Roger  Williams  and  his  followers,  with  whom  the  Bap- 
tist church  in  the  United  States  originated,  were  not  bap- 
tized in  adult  age.^     Consequently — 

(a)  From  the  fifth  to  the  twelfth  centuries,  viz.  from 
the  year  of  our  Lord  400  to  1 1 50  (seven  hundred  and 
fifty  years)  the  line  of  true  or  gospel  baptism  was  inter- 
rupted, and  it  was  impossible  to  know  Avho  was  and  who 
was  not  scripturally  baptized  during  all  that  period,  or 
whether  the  Baptists,  who  arose  subsequently,  received 
the  ordinance  from  persons  authorized  to  administer  it 
or  not. 

'Authentic  Hist.  viz.  Benedict,  Backus'  Church  History,  et  al. 


MODE    OP    BAPTISM.  299 

(h)  The  Baptists  in  the  United  States  have  not  the 
ordinance  among  them,  because  their  founder  and  his  dis- 
ciples from  whom  they  received  it,  had  no  right  to  per- 
form the  ceremony. 

But  this  is  not  all ;  if  true  baptism  does  not  exist,  even 
in  the  Baptist  churches,  neither  does  the  Lord's  supper, 
for  no  one  has  a  right  to  administer  or  partake  of  this  or- 
dinance, who  is  not  duly  baptized.  Nor  do  we  stop 
here ;  if  we  have  neither  baptism  nor  eucharist,  neither 
have  we  a  visible  Christian  church  in  the  world.  Con- 
sequently this  theory  unchurches  our  brethren  "as  com- 
pletely as  it  does  us. — Now  then,  our  Baptist  brethren 
are  found  in  the  same  dilemma,  in  which  the  Catholics 
have  long  since  been  placed,  in  regard  to  the  "divine 
succession,"  the  legitimacy  of  popery  and  the  genuine* 
ness  of  their  episcopal  ordination.  If  they  can  extricate 
themselves  from  this  difficulty,  it  strikes  us  they  will,  at 
least  be  entitled  to  much  credit  for  ingenuity,  though  it 
may  perhaps  be  at  the  cost  of  sound  logic. 

This  argument  may  be  thrown  into  the  form  of  a  the- 
orem, which  will  present  it  to  a  logical  mind  in  a  stronger 
light  and  give  it  all  the  force  of  a  mathematical  demon- 
stration. 

In  stating  this  theorem  let  it  be  observed,  that  we 
adopt,  for  the  sake  of  illustration,  and  to  expose  its  fal- 
lacy, the  Baptist  doctrine  of  submersion.  According  to 
this  doctrine,  the  subjoined  axioms  and  corollaries,  ap- 
pear to  us  to  stand  indissolubly  connected. 

THEOREM. 

AXIOMS. 

1 .  Baptism  is  the  submersion  in  water  of  an  adult  be- 
liever, in  the  name  of  the  Trinity  by  a  person  duly  au- 
thorized to  administer  the  ordinance. 


300  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

2.  Baptism,  in  this  form  alone,  is  the  only  means  of 
admission  into  the  visible  Christian  church. 

3.  No  person  is  qualified  to  administer  the  ordinance, 
unless  he,  himself,  has  been  baptized  according  to  this 
mode. 

4.  The  Lord's  supper  can  only  be  celebrated  by  a  vis- 
ible Christian  church,  and  none  but  members  of  such  a 
church,  that  is,  persons  baptized  by  submersion,  have  a 
right  to  partake  of  it. 

From  these  axioms  unavoidably  flow  the  following 
corollaries  : 

COROLLARIES. 

1 .  All  those  who  have  not  been  baptized  (by  submer- 
sion of  course)  in  adult  age  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity, 
are  not  members  of  the  visible  Christian  church.  (Ac- 
cording to  axioms  1  and  2.) 

2.  All  those  societies  calling  themselves  churches, 
■whose  members  have  not  been  plunged  under  the  water 
in  adult  age,  are  not  visible  Christian  churches.  (Ax.  1,  2.) 

3.  All  those  men  professing  to  be  ministers  who  have 
not  t)een  submersed  in  adult  age,  are  not  ministers  of  the 
visible  Christian  church.  (Ax.  1  and  2.) 

4.  Their  administration  of  baptism,  no  matter  in  what 
mode,  is  null  and  void.  (Ax.  3  and  4.) 

5.  The  nominal  celebration  of  the  holy  supper,  by 
such  pretended  churches  and  administered  by  such  pre- 
tended ministers,  is  positively  no  sacrament,  the  whole 
transaction,  including  the  ceremony,— the  participants 
and  the  administrator,  is  clearly  and  absolutely  spurious. 
(Ax.  2  and  4.) 

6.  No  one  believing  the  doctrine  of  submersion  dare 
commune  with  a  congregation,  whose  members  do  not 
hold  to  that  doctrine,  because  such  communion  would  be 
thought  a  tacit,  yet  a  reprehensible   acknowldgment  of 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  301 

said  congregation  as  a  visible  Christian  church ;— of  its 
teachers  as  valid  ministers  of  the  visible  Christian  church, 
and  of  its  communion  as  a  Christian  sacrament.  (Ax.  1, 
2,  4  and  5.) 

7.  It  is  not  competent  for  an  individual  who  has  not 
been  submersed  in  adult  age,  to  partake  of  the  holy  sup- 
per in  a  visible  Christian  church,  because  he  is  hot  a 
member  of  any  visible  Christian  church  and  therefore  has 
no  right  whatever  to  that  ordinance.  (Ax.  4.) 

8.  It  is  inconsistent  and  highly  censurable  for  a  minis- 
ter of  a  visible  Christian  church  to  exchange  pulpits,  or 
services  of  any  kind  that  are  peculiarly  ministerial,  with 
a  teacher  who  has  not  been  submersed  in  adult  age  ;  for 
this  is  a  public  acknowledgment  of  him  not  only  as  a 
member,  but  as  a  minister  of  the  visible  Christian  church ; 
whereas  in  point  of  fact  he  is  neither  the  one  nor  the 
other. 

POSTULATES. 

1.  From  the  year  of  our  Lord  400  to  the  year  1150, 
no  part  of  the  church,  so  far  as  authentic  church  history 
informs  us,  limited  baptism  to  adults  only. 

2.  The  founders  or  originators  of  the  Baptist  church 
in  the  United  States,  viz.  Roger  Williams  and  his  disci- 
ples were  not  one  of  them  baptized  in  adult  age.'    Then— 

'Rev.  Roger  Williams  establislaed  tlie  first  Baptist  churcli  in  Amer- 
ica at  Providence,  Rhode  Island,  in  1639.  Mr.  Williams  had  been 
pastor  of  tlie  church  in  Salem,  Massachusetts;  Mr.  Ezekiel  Holyman 
was  a  deacon  of  the  same  church.  When  the  church  in  Providence 
was  organized  Ezekiel  Holyman  re-baptized  Mr.  Williams.  Then 
Mr.  Williams  re-baptized  Ezekiel  Holyman  and  ten  others.  Ac- 
cording to  the  system  of  our  Baptist  bretlu-en,  neither  of  them  was 
baptized,  nor  had  any  right  to  baptize  others.  This  is  the  origin  of 
tlie  Baptist  church  in  America,  and  of  course  of  its  baptisms.  See 
Morton's  Memorial  of  New  England,  Winthrop's  Journal  and 
Backus'  Church  History. 
26 


302  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

COROLLARIES. 

9.  There  is  no  certain  knowledge  of  any  visible  Chris-' 
tian  church  in  the  world  from  the  fifth  to  the  twelfth  cen- 
turies ;  seven  hundred  and  fifty  years.  (Ax.  1  and  2,  and 
Pos.  1.) 

10.  The  Baptist  churches  in  the  United  States  are  not 
visible  Christian  churches.  (Axiom  3  and  Postulate  2.) 

11.  There  is  now  no  visible  Christian  church  in  the 
world,  unless  it  be  the  Baptist.  (Ax.  1,  and  3.) 

And  it  is  most  clear  that — 

12.  The  Baptist  is  not  a  visible  Christian  church. — 
(Post.  1  and  2,  and  Cor.  9  and  10.) 

Thus,  our  Baptist  brethren  commence  with  denying 
the  validity  of  our  mode  of  baptism,  and  end  with  tear- 
ing up  by  the  root  their  own ;  they  start  Avith  rejecting 
sprinkling,  and  wind  up  Avith  depriving  the  whole  Chris- 
tian community,  themselves  included,  of  the  Lord's  sup- 
per ;  they  begin  with  setting  aside  our  right  of  church- 
membership,  and  close  with  completely  annihilating  their 
own  ecclesiastical  existence  ;  they  set  out  with  claiming 
to  be  the  only  visible  Christian  church,  and  terminate 
with  blotting  from  existence  every  vestige  of  a  visible 
Christian  church  on  the  face  of  the  earth  ! 

We  would  by  no  means  charge  them  with  pressing 
their  principles  to  this  extreme,  for  we  know  not  pre- 
cisely how  far  their  practice  corresponds  with  their 
theory ;  what  we  mean  is,  that  tlie  doctrine  of  submer- 
sion as  held  by  them,  must  lead  to  these  results,  if  hon- 
estly and  consistently  carried  out  to  their  full  extent. 

Now,  we  will  simply  put  the  question,  whether  a  the- 
ory like  this,  can  plead  scriptural  Avarrant,  and  Avhether 
the  doctrine  of  afiusion  is  chargeable  Avith  such  extrava- 
gant logical  results  ?  Is  it  too  much  then  to  say,  that  this 
doctrine  is  more  scriptural,  appropriate  and  edifying  ? 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  303 

Before  we  close,  we  must  be  allowed  to  reply  to  a  few 
objections  to  baptism  by  affusion,  which  have  not  been 
fully  met  in  the  preceding  pages.  These  objections 
though  trivia]  in  their  character,  are  not  without  their  in- 
fluence over  many  sincere  though  generally  uninformed 
minds,  and  must  not  therefore  be  passed  by  in  silence. 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 

OBJECTIONS  TO  BAPTISM  BY  AFFUSION. 
FIRST    OBJECTIOX. 

1.  It  is  objected  that  affusion  or  sprinkling  is  an  in- 
sufficient mode  of  baptism.  "  How,"  says  the  adver- 
sary, "  can  a  filthy  garment  be  cleansed  by  merely  pouring 
or  sprinkling  a  little  water  on  it?"  And  hence,  as  if  the 
argument  were  complete,  it  is  inferred  that  baptism  also, 
if  performed  by  aspersion,  would  be  a  mock  cleansing. 
We  marvel  that  such  an  objection  should  ever  have  found 
its  way  into  this  world  of  error;  for  it  is  calculated  to  im- 
pose only  on  the  ignorant,  and  even  in  regard  to  them, 
the  delusion  must  vanish  so  soon  as  they  learn  to  form  a 
correct  view  of  the  subject.  It  is  however  brought  for- 
ward only  for  want  of  something  more  solid  and  rational. 
In  reply  we  remark — 

1.  That  the  objection  proceeds  from  a  false  assump- 
tion in  relation  to  the  design  of  baptism.  It  will  not  be 
contended  by  the  intelligent  that  baptism  is  intended  to 
remove  that  common  filth,  Avhich  from  personal  neglect, 
accumulates  upon  the  surface  of  the  body.  And  yet 
strange  as  it  may  appear,  this  is  the  identical  construc- 
tion which  all  those  force  upon  the  ordinance,  who  press 
too  closely  the  analogy  between  common  and  ceremonial 
washings.  If  ceremonial  ablutions  had  been  designed 
originally  to  effect  a  kindred  purpose  with  that  of  house- 
hold washings,  Ave  readily  concede  that  the  quantity  of 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  305 

water  and  the  mode  of  applying  it,  would  materially  af- 
fect the  efficiency  of  their  administration.  But  the  case 
is  far  otherwise.  Domestic  washings  are  used  only  to 
effect  a  physical  cleansing,  while  ceremonial  washings 
borrow  all  their  importance  from  their  mystical  signifi- 
cation,— not  from  their  visible  efl'ects ; — and  hence  the 
mere  quantum  of  water  is  not  a  circumstance  of  primary 
moment. 

But  cannot  our  Baptist  brethren  perceive  that  their 
weapon,  like  the  elephants  of  King  Pyrrhus,  turns  back 
upon  their  own  ranks  ?  By  their  own  showing,  their 
own  mode  of  baptism  is  insufficient ;  they  are  defeated 
on  their  own  principles,  no  less  than  we.  If  the  analogy, 
above  alluded  to,  is  to  be  thus  hardly  pressed ;  if  sprink- 
ling is  to  be  denounced  on  the  score  of  inefficacy,  then 
certainly  the  difficulty  is  not  removed  by  a  resort  to  im- 
mersion. If  sprinkling  a  garment  will  not  cleanse  it, 
who  can  be  so  silly  as  to  imagine  that  simple  immersion 
will? — Thus  the  objection  is  as  fatal  to  immersion  as  it 
is  to  sprinkling : — let  our  Baptist  brethren  themselves  be 
t)ie  judges. 

2.  Again,  the  common  sense  of  mankind  may  be  ap- 
pealed to,  as  proof  of  the  absurdity  of  this  objection.  It 
was  a  common  custom  among  the  Hebrews,  Greeks  and 
Latins,  to  wash-  their  hands  in  token  of  their  innocence, 
and  to  show  that  they  were  pure  from  any  imputed  guilt. 
So  also,  according  to  the  Mussulman's  creed,  ablution 
consists  in  washing  the  hands,  feet,  face,  and  part  of  the 
head.  The  devotee  is  then  pronounced  wholly  clean. 
Thus,  by  different  nations,  in  different  ages  of  the  world, 
has  the  principle  been  clearly  recognized,  that  perfect  or 
entire  purity,  may  be  significantly  represented  by  apply- 
ing water  to  a  part  of  the  body  only.  But  what  renders 
26* 


306  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

this  circumstance  of  weight  in  the  present  controversy, 
is,  that  the  Bible  itself  has  given  sanction  to  the  principle. 
Anciently,  among  the  Hebrews,  when  the  body  of  a  mur- 
dered man  was  found,  and  the  guilty  perpetrator  had 
-eluded  discovery,  the  elders  of  the  city,  nearest  the  spot 
where  the  body  was  found,  were  required  to  wash  their 
hands  over  a  slain  heifer,  as  a  public  protestation  of  their 
innocence  of  the  undiscovered  murderer.  Deut.  xxi. 
1 — 9.  But  why  were  they  not  required  to  immerse 
themselves,  if  the  principle  of  our  opponents  be  correct, 
and  if  consequently,  ?l  partial  washing  may  not  represent 
entire  purity  ?  David  says,  "  I  will  wash  my  hands  in 
innocency."  Ps.  xxvi.  6.  Here  undeniably,  the  wash- 
ing of  the  hands  betokened  the  entire  purity,  or  innocence, 
of  the  ivhole  man.  So  also,  Pilate  "  took  water  and 
washed  his  hands,  saying,  I  am  innocent  of  the  blood  of 
this  just  person."  Matt,  xxvii.  24.  But  why  did  he 
not  immerse  himself  in  token  of  his  alleged  innocency  ? 

3.  But  the  subject  admits  of  other  proof.  Ps.  li.  7, 
David  prays  :  SPRINKLE  [g^wm)  me  with  hyssop,  and 
I  shall  be  clean.  Ezek.  xxxvi.  25  :  "  Then  will  I  sprin- 
kle clean  water  upon  you,  and  you  shall  be  clean.''.'' 

Heb.  x.  22  :  "  Having  your  hearts  sprinkled  from  an 
evil  conscience." 

Heb.  ix.  13:  "  The  blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats  and 
the  ashes  of  an  heifer,  sprinkling  the  unclean,  sanctifieth 
to  the  purifying  of  the  flesh." 

We  by  no  means  adduce  these  passages  as  direct  proof 
that  Christian  baptism  should  be  performed  by  sprinkling, 
but  simply  to  show  that  Jehovah  has  long  since  settled 
the  principle  in  his  church,  that  a  partial  washing,  or 
sprinkling  the  body  with  water,  may  suflice  to  represent 
an  entire  cleansing  of  the  moral  man.     And  we  wish  our 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  307 

opponents  to  bear  it  distinctly  in  mind,  that  when  they 
ridicule  the  practice  of  baptism  by  sprinkling,  on  the 
score  of  its  inefficacy,  they  ridicule  ^principle  that  God 
himself  has,  from  the  remotest  antiquity  of  the  church, 
settled  by  his  own  authority. 

But  we  have  something  more  to  do  with  the  principle 
under  consideration.  The  subject  assumes  too  serious 
an  aspect  to  be  scouted  away  by  the  frivolity  of  superfi- 
cial thinkers.  When  the  Bible  speaks  of  the  application 
of  the  blood  of  Christ  to  the  heart  in  order  to  effect  (not 
a  ceremonial  but)  a  real  cleansing,  it  employs  the  follow- 
ing allusion  :  "  Elect  *  *  *  through  sanctification  of  the 
Spirit  *  *  *  and  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ." 
1  Pet.  i.  2.  The  same  reference  is  also  made,  Heb.  ix. 
13 — 14,  and  x.  22.  So  also,  Heb.  xii.  24:  "Ye  are 
come  *  *  *  to  Jesus  and  to  the  blood  o/" sprinkling." 

But  why  is  not  the  allusion  made  to  immersion  instead 
of  sprinkling  ?  Will  our  opponents  ridicule  the  idea  of 
cleansing  the  heart  from  moral  defilement  by  having  the 
blood  of  Christ  sprinkled  upon  it  ?  Why  then  should 
they  speak  lightly  of  having  water  sprinkled  upon  the 
body,  when  the  object  is  merely  to  represent  this  moral 
cleansing  ?  "  There  are  three,"  says  John,  "  that  bear 
witness  in  earth,  the  Spirit,  the  water,  and  the  blood." 
1  John  v.  8.  We  are  acquainted  with  the  operations  of 
the  Spirit  and  the  application  of  the  blood  of  atonement, 
only  by  their  aflusion  upon  the  heart.  This  is  the  mode 
in  which  they  uniformly  yield  their  testimony  to  the  di- 
vinity and  Messiahship  of  Christ.  Analogy  therefore, 
would  teach  us  that  the  Avater  of  baptism,  in  order  the 
more  forcibly  to  "  agree  in  one"  testimony  with  the 
"  Spirit  and  the  blood,"  should  agree  with  them  also  in 
the  mode  of  its  application — i.  e.  should  be  sprinkled  or 
poured  upon,  the  body.     There  is  a  remarkable  instance 


308  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

recorded  in  Isa.  vi.  7,  of  the  entire  purgation  of  the 
prophet,  by  simply  applying  a  coal  of  fire  to  his  lips. 
"  Lo,"  says  the  seraph,  "  this  hath  touched  thy  lips  and 
thy  iniquity  is  taken  away  and  thy  sin  is  purged."  So 
far  as  the  principle  under  consideration  is  involved,  we 
might  ask,  is  there  any  thing  more  absurd,  in  supposing 
that  an  application  of  water  to  otie  part  of  the  body  may 
represent  the  entire  purgation  of  the  whole  man  from 
moral  defilement,  than  in  supposing  such  a  purgation  to 
be  actually  effected  by  applying  a  coal  of  fire  to  the  lips 
only  ? 

SECOND    OBJECTION. 

2.  It  is  further  objected  to  the  practice  of  sprinkling, 
that  ^^  there  is  no  cross  in  z7;"  while  the  cross  of  being 
immersed  is  a  circumstance  urged  in  proof  of  the  superior 
and  exclusive  merits  of  that  mode,  the  mode  by  affusion 
is  condemned  as  not  requiring  any  sacrifice  of  feeling  or 
comfort.  Simple  as  this  objection  may  appear,  it  is  not 
without  its  influence  over  many  sincere  Christians.  All 
Christians  it  is  urged,  must  bear  the  cross  of  Christ,  that 
is,  a  cross  to  which  we  feel  a  strong  repugnance.  And 
hence  it  is  loosely  inferred,  that  to  overcome  our  repug- 
nance to  a  particular  act,  is  to  bear  the  cross  of  Christ. 
Those  who  reason  thus,  seem  to  measure  the  cross  of 
Christ  in  any  particular  duty,  according  to  their  reluctance 
to  perform  it.  This  we  are  well  assured,  is  the  popular 
view  taken  of  this  subject.  And  if  people  w^ould  examine 
the  matter  with  candor  and  impartiality,  they  would  find 
that  what  generally  passes  under  the  specious  appellation 
of  the  cross  of  Christ  in  immersion,  is  nothing  else  than 
the  irrepressible  risings  of  a  constitutional  repugnance  of 
such  treatment  of  the  body.  To  persons  living  in  frigid 
climates,  there  is  a  strong  resistance  to  being  plunged  into 
the  water.     This  resistance  arises,  not  from  the  force  of 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  309 

theological  opinions,  but  from  the  natural  effects  of  cli- 
mate on  the  physiological   constitution.     On  the    other 
hand,,  in  the  torrid  regions,  to  be  dipped  into  the  water  is 
a  luxury  ardently  craved  by  every  impulse  of  the  lan- 
guishing  system.     Yet   the    cross    of   Christ   no    more 
strongly  marks  the  immersion  of  an  Icelander  than  that 
of  a  Cingalese.     The  Author  of  our  being  has  implanted 
in  our  nature  for  our  own  welfare,  an  instinctive  propen- 
sity to  resist  any  sudden  or  unexpected   hazard  of  our 
safety.     The  operations  of  this  instinct  are  involuntary 
and  without  the  co-operation  either  of  the  will  or  the  ra- 
tional faculty.     It  is  our  settled  conviction  founded  upon 
somewhat  extensive  observation,  that  many,  very  many, 
who  deeply  imbibe  the  doctrine  of  exclusive  immersion 
beforehand,  still,  at  the  moment  of  baptism,  experience 
so  much  agitation  and  alarm  as  utterly  to  preclude  that 
sense  of  religious  obligation   and   devotional    awe    that 
should  wholly  pervade  and  possess  the  mind.     Still  we 
are  taunted  with  the  opprobrium  of  avoiding  the  "  cross," 
of  inclining  to  a  merely  fleshly,  selfish  ease,  to  the  sub- 
version of  a  pure  administration  of  Christian  baptism,  and 
this,  because  we  deny  the  theory  of  exclusive  immersion  ! 
Is  it  reasonable  to    expect  Pedobaptists  to  submit  to  a 
usage  inconsistent  with  their  views  of  duty,  merely  to 
show  their  Avillingness  to  "  take  up  the  cross  ?"     May 
they  not,  and  do  they  not  evince  that  disposition,  in  num- 
berless other  instances  in  which  it  is  their  duty  to  do  so  ? 
Have  they  not  advanced  to  the  front  ranks  in  the  great 
strife,  and  exhibited  themselves  valiant  for  God  and  the 
ti-uth  ?     Have  they  sunk  into  concealment  in  the  hour  of 
persecution  and  the  times  which  have  tried  men's  souls  ? 
Have  they  ever  betrayed  the  common  cause,  or  given  any 
just  ground  for  a  latent  suspicion,  (much  less  a  public 
proclamation,)  on  the  part  of  their  Baptist  brethren,  that 


310  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

like  the  apostate  Galatians,  they  wished  to  "  avoid  the 
cross  of  Christ?"  Where  then,  is  the  justice — where 
the  truth  of  these  insidious  whisperings  of  defection  ? 
We  repudiate  the  ungenerous  reflection  thus  cast  forth 
upon  the  fair  reputation  of  the  great  body  of  the  church  ; 
while  we  assure  the  reader  that  if,  in  his  estimation,  we 
have  descended  to  an  odious  personality  in  our  argumen- 
tum  ad  hominem,  it  has  not  resulted  from  our  choice, 
but  from  the  necessity  of  the  case  and  the  delicacy  of  our 
position  in  this  unfortunate  controversy/ 

THIRD    ODJECTION. 

3.  A  third  objection  urged  by  our  Baptist  brethren, 
particularly  in  their  discussions  with  members  of  the 
Lutheran  church,  is,  "  that  jAither  himself,  the  great 
reformer,  condemned  the  practice  of  sprinkling,  and 
even  disapproved  of  infant  baptism.  That  any  one  not 
utterly  regardless  of  his  reputation,  should  hazard  an  as- 
sertion so  entirely  unfounded,  is  a  matter  of  as  much  re- 
gret as  it  is  of  surprise ;  for  Luther's  writings  thoughout, 
abound  with  the  most  conclusive  evidence  in  support  of 
pedobaptism  as  well  as  of  his  conviction  of  the  propriety 
and  validity  of  its  performance  by  aff"usion ;  even  his 
hostility  to  the  abuses  of  papacy,  is  not  susceptible  of 
clearer  or  stronger  proof.  We  have  gone  to  the  trouble 
to  collect  a  few  passages  from  those  writings,  which  we 
shall  here  translate  for  the  benefit  of  our  readers,  and 
which  we  have  no  doubt  will  prove  fully  satisfactory  to 
every  candid  reader ; — we  would  direct  attention  particu- 
larly to  those  portions  of  the  extracts  which  are  printed 
in  italics : — 

"  That  the  dipping  of  a  child  in  water  or  sprinkling  it 
with  water  according  to  the  command  of  Christ,  should 

'See  Rev.  F.  G.  Hibbard  on  the  Mode  of  Baptism. 


MODE    OF   BAPTISM.  311 

cleanse  it  from  sin  and  transfer  it  from  the  kingdom  of 
Satan  to  the  kingdom  of  God,  is  reviled  by  reason,"  &c. 
See  Singularia  Lutheri  by  Philip  Saltzman,  Jena  edition 
1564,  Tit.  220.      Art.  Baptism  p.  657. 

"  Inasmuch  as  there  is  neither  ornament  nor  honor  at 
baptism  and  God  does  outwardly  no  more  than  apply  a 
Handful  of  ivater,^^  &c.     Ibid  chap.  viii.  p.  669. 

"  I-  consider  that  by  far  the  safest  baptism  is  the  bap- 
tism of  children  ;  for  as  Judas  came  to  Christ  to  be  bap- 
tized, so  an  adult  may  practice  deception  ;  but  an  infant 
cannot  deceive,  and  comes  to  Christ  in  baptism  like  John 
and  like  the  children  that  were  brought  to  him,"  Sic. 
Ibid  chap.  x.  p.  602. 

"  We  conclude  that  children  believe  at  baptism  and 
have  a  faith  of  their  own,  that  God  produces  it  in  them 
in  answer  to  the  faithful  prayers  and  obedience  of  the 
sponsors,"  &c.     Ibid  chap.  xi.  p.  663. 

"  Devils  must  flee  from  baptism  ;  why  ? — they  do  not 
regard  the  water  and  the  letter,  but  it  is  because  God  has 
commanded  that  we  must  use  our  hand  and  tongue  in  ad- 
ministering it  bi/  sprinkling  water  upon  the  subject  in 
connection  with  the  words  prescribed  by  God,"  &c.  Ibid, 
chap.  xi.  p.  663. 

"  We  must  endeavor  by  all  means  to  honor  baptism  by 
word  and  work,  for  therefore  we  have  the  baptismal  font, 
the  altar,  and  pulpit,  that  they  may  receive  us  and  bear 
testimony  that  we  are  baptized  and  belong  to  Christ," 
&c.     Ibid.  chap.  15,  p.  667. 

Luther's  letter  inviting  a  lady  to  become  sponsor  to  hia 
own  child,  will  both  gratify  the  curious  and  add  to  the 
amount  of  evidence  on  this  point ;  it  is  as  follows  : 

"  Grace  and  peace  in  Christ ;  honorable  and  virtuous 
lady  ;  dear  friend ;  God  has  bestowed  upon  me  a  young 


312  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

heathen,  taken  from  my  and  my  dear  wife's  body ;  I  invite 
you  for  the  Lord's  sake  that  you  will  do  me  the  favor  to 
aid  in  introducing  her  to  Christianity  and  become  her 
spiritual  mother,  in  order  that  through  your  instrument- 
ality and  assistance  (I  mean  by  your  prayers)  she  may 
pass  from  the  old  birth  of  Adam  to  the  nev/  birth  of  Christ 
by  holy  baptism.  I  will  strive  to  make  myself  deserving 
of  the  kindness,  I  commend  you  to  God,  Amen."  Table 
Talk,  appendix  chap,  xxxiii.  F.  55. 

Martinus  Luther. 
It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  comment  on  any  particular 
portion  of  the  foregoing  extracts,  for  they  constitute  an 
almost  solid  phalanx  of  proof,  the  most  clear  and  conclu- 
sive, not  only  that  Luther  insisted  on  infant  baptism,  but 
also  that  he  entirely  approved  of  the  mode  by  affusion  or 
sprinkling.  It  is  however  highly  probable  that  at  an 
early  period  in  the  reformation,  he  inclined  to  the  opinion 
that  infants  should  be  ^^ pretty  well  dipt,''^  but  at  no  time 
did  he  consider  such  dipping  essential;  but  on  most  oc- 
casions when  he  adverted  to  the  subject,  he  gave  us  to 
understand  unequivocally,  that  he.  regarded  the  mode  by 
sprinkling,  pouring,  the  application  of  "  a  mere  handful 
of  water,"  &c.,  as  fully  adequate  and  valid.  His  appa- 
rent original  preference  (it  was  a  mere  preference)  of  dip- 
ping, was  soon  abandoned,  and  as  he  grew  older,  he 
settled  down  into  the  same  opinion  that  is  now  entertained 
by  the  great  body  of  Lutheran  divines  in  the  United 
States.  Such  is  the  conviction  to  which  we  have  been 
led  by  a  careful  and  extensive  examination  of  his  wri- 
tings, and  the  foregoing  extracts  sufficiently  prove  its 
correctness. 

A  few  more  citations  from  Luther  may  not  be  unac- 
ceptable to  our  readers : 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  313 

In  the  year  1541,  Luther  preached  two  sermons  on 
baptism,  occasioned  by  the  administration  of  the  ordi- 
nance to  the  child  of  the  prince  of  Anhalt.  In  the  second 
of  these  sermons  [Siebenter  Theil,  Fol.  439 — 441,)  he 
says:  "Baptism  consists  of  three  parts,  1.  water,  2. 
God's  word,  3.  GocVs  command  and  ordinance  f^  he 
then  proceeds  in  these  words :  "  Here  no  more  is  done 
than  that  the  subject,  according  to  God's  command,  is 
dipped,  (in's  Wasser  getaucht,)  or  the  water  is  poured 
upon  him,  (ueber  ihn  gegossen,)  and  the  words  pro- 
nounced :  I  baptize  you  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  &c. 
If  this  is  done,  doubt  not  that  it  is  a  lawful  and  perfect 
baptism ;  nor  need  you  inquire  whether  he  who  adminis- 
ters the  ordinance  is  a  pious  and  believing  man.  Though 
he  should  not  be  so,  (for  as  to  what  he  personally  is, 
that  does  not  concern  the  efficacy  of  the  ordinance)  if  he 
only  uses  the  words  of  the  institution  and  does  not  take 
wine,  or  beer,  or  lye,  or  any  thing  else  but  water  in  con- 
nection with  God's  word,  it  is  a  holy  and  acceptable  bap- 
tism. For  all  that  is  essential  to  baptism  is  the  use  of 
natural  water  in  connection  with  the  loords  of  the  insti- 
tution." 

In  1542  John  Bugenhagen  published  a  little  tract  on 
infant  baptism,  of  ivhich  Luther  approved,  and  to  which 
he  made  some  additions.  It  contains  an  elaborate  argu- 
ment in  favor  of  pedobaptism,  and  the  following  is  an 
extract  from  it:  "  Again,  if  any  one  can  obtain  baptism, 
and  yet  cavils  in  this  manner  :  how  can  a  mere  handful 
of  loatcr  be  of  any  benefit  ? — he  cannot  be  saved.  For 
he  despises  God's  word  and  the  ordinance  of  Christ ;  he 
treats  Christ  as  though  he  had  acted  foolishly  in  ordaining 
and  commanding  things  useless.  Luthefs  Works, 
Achter  Theil,  Fol.  58. 
27 


314  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

Luther's  hostility  to  the  Anabaptists  is  notorious ;  of 
this  we  have  a  curious  specimen  in  a  letter  addressed  to 
his  wife. 

Copia  of  a  letter  of  Dr.  M.  L.  to  his  beloved  wife^ 
written  in  Halle. 

"  1546,  Num.  61. 
"  Grace  and  peace  in  the  Lord  ! 

"  Dear  Katy  ;  we  arrived  at  Halle  to-day  at  8  o'clock,. 
but  we  could  not  go  to  Eisleben.  We  were  met  by  a 
large  Anabaptist  woman  with  waves  of  water  and  great 
cakes  of  ice  that  covered  the  ground  ;  she  threatened  to 
baptize  us  over  again,'  and  as  we  could  not  retreat  in  con- 
sequence of  the  Mulda  (a  stream  of  water)  in  our  rear,  we 
were  obliged  to  remain  in  Halle,  between  the  waters  ;  not 
however  as  though  we  thirsted  for  so  much  water,  &c. 

"  Martinus  Luther,  D. 

"  To  my  kind  and  beloved  "  Katy  Luther 
in  Wittenberg." 

This  letter  was  written,  as  before  stated,  in  1546,  that 
is,  in  the  year  of  Luther's  death  ;  and  every  one  will 
perceive  that  he  could  at  that  period  have  had  no  predi- 
lection for  the  views  of  the  Baptists,  inasmuch  as  it  treats 
those  views  with  not  a  little  irreverence,  and  even  with 
ridicule — at  least  by  implication. 

We  leave  our  readers  to  judge  for  themselves,  from  the 
foregoing  extracts,  what  amount  of  credit  is  due  to  the 
objection  made  by  some  of  our  Baptist  brethren,  that 
Luther  believed  in  the  necessity  of  submersion  to  the  ex- 
clusion of  affusion,  or  that  he  was  not  decidedly  in  favor 
of  children's  being  baptized.  To  our  more  enlightened 
readers  we  may  owe  an  apology,  for  making  our  extracts 

'Luther  had  been  baptized  in  his  infancy  byq^w«on,and  consider- 
ing that  vaUd,  he  was  never  re-baptized. 


MODE    OF  BAPTISM.  315 

SO  copious  and  dwelling  so  long  on  this  subject ;  but  the 
less  informed,  Avho  have  been  assailed  again  and  again 
by  this  groundless  objection,  without  ability  to  refute  it, 
will  know  better  how  to  appreciate  our  effort.  We  need 
scarcely  remark  that  Luther  evidendy  laid  more  stress 
on  baptism  than  many  are  inclined  to  in  the  present  day, 
and  that  Avhatever  may  have  been  his  opinion  as  to  the 
efficacy  and  indispensable  necessity  of  the  ordinance,  we 
do  not  feel  bound  to  follow  him  any  further  than  as  he 
followed  Christ. 


We  have  now  brought  our  discussion  to  a  close  ;  with 
what  success,  we  are  perfectly  willing  that  an  unbiassed 
public  shall  decide.  As  we  wrote  mainly,  though  not 
exclusively,  for  the  benefit  of  the  unlearned,  it  frequently 
seemed  necessary  to  enter  into  detail  and  expand  our  re- 
marks beyond  what  would  otherwise  have  been  deemed 
necessary  ;  thus  the  limits  which  we  originally  prescribed 
to  ourselves,  have  been  greatly  transcended,  not  however 
so  much,  we  hope,  as  to  render  the  work  particularly 
tedious. 

It  has  been  our  uniform  endeavor  to  treat  those,  whose 
views  we  have  in  the  providence  of  God  been  called  to 
oppose,  with  due  deference  ;  nor  are  we  conscious  of 
having  in  the  whole  course  of  the  discussion,  indulged 
one  single  unkind  feeling  towards  our  Baptist  brethren. 
If  a  harsh  word  or  a  disrespectful  remark  has  escaped  us, 
God  is  our  witness  that  it  Avas  not  designed,  and  we  sin- 
cerely pray  the  Father  of  mercies  to  pardon  us,  and  not 
to  suffer  the  cause  of  Christ  and  the  rights  of  "little 
children"  to  receive  any  prejudice  on  account  of  a  want  of 
temperateness  on  our  part.  Our  object  has  been  to  con- 
tend for  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Christ,  and  not  for  victory  ; — 


316  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

and  to  contend  for  and  promote  that  truth,  in  the  love  of 
it,  and  with  the  meek  and  fraternal  spirit  which  it  never 
fails  to  inspire,  when  permitted  to  exercise  its  divine  in- 
fluence upon  the  heart. 

In  conclusion,  let  Christian  parents  once"more  be  re- 
minded of  their  duty,  and  urged  to  present  their  offspring 
to  God  in  baptism.  Think  not,  dear  friends,  that  if  you 
neglect  this  duty,  the  omission  is  a  matter  of  minor  im- 
portance. "  You  are  evidently  casting  contempt  on  a  di- 
vine institution,  established  by  God  and  observed  by  his 
people  for  generations ;  and  one  which  received  the  appro- 
bation and  sanction  of  Christ  and  his  apostles.  Do  you, 
can  you  suppose  then  that  he  will  smile  upon  you,  and 
bless  you  and  your  household,  whilst  you  live  in  a  ne- 
glect of  this  duty  ?  Consistently  you  cannot:  for  'who- 
soever shall  break  the  least  commandment,  shall  be  called 
least  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven.'  How  often  did  Jesus 
perform  wonders,  and  heal  the  sick,  on  account  of  the  be- 
lieving entreaties  of  their  friends !  How  cheerfully  did 
he  bestow  his  benediction  upon  children,  on  account  of 
the  faith  and  earnest  desire  of  their  parents  !  If  you  love 
your  little  ones  therefore  and  feel  concerned  for  their  pre- 
sent and  eternal  welfare,  bring  them  in  the  arms  of  faith 
to  Jesus,  and  consecrate  them  to  his  service.  '  He  will 
in  no  wise  cast  them  out ;  he  will  carry  them  in  his  bo- 
som, and  lead  them  into  paths  of  righteousness  for  his 
name's  sake.' 

"  Have  you  already  dedicated  your  offspring  to  God, 
forget  not  your  solemn  vows  and  obligations.  Call  to 
mind  the  eventful  hour,  when  in  the  presence  of  the 
heart-searching  God,  you  promised  and  bound  yourselves 
by  ties  never  to  be  dissolved,  to  train  them  up  in  his 
fear  and  for  his  glory.  Remember  that  you  are  intrusted 
with  the  care  of  immortal  souls,  who  are  soon  to  enter 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  317 

upon  an  existence  that  will  never  terminate  ;  and  whose 
everlasting  happiness  or  misery,  stands  intimately  con- 
nected with  your  exertions  and  prayers.  '  These  lights, 
lighted  for  eternity,  it  is  yours  to  feed  with  holy  oil  from 
the  sanctuary  of  God,  that  they  may  burn,  with  pui-e  and 
lovely  radiance,  before  the  throne  above.  These  never- 
dying  plants,  it  is  yours  to  rear  and  to  cherish,  bringing 
down  upon  them,  by  your  supplications,  the  dews  and 
rains  of  heaven,  that  so  they  may  flourish  and  bear  fruit 
forever,  in  the  paradise  of  God.'  Let  us  entreat  you 
then.  Christian  parents,  'to  take  that  child  and  nurse  it 
for  God.'  Take  it  to  a  throne  of  grace.  Teach  it  early 
the  importance  of  religion  and  the  science  of  salvation, 
•  when  thou  sittest  in  thine  house,  and  when  thou  walkest 
by  the  way,  and  when  thou  liest  down,  and  when  thou 
risest  up.'  Be  more  concerned  to  make  it  an  heir  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  than  to  raise  it  to  the  possession  of 
great  worldly  opulence  and  distinction.  Impress  upon 
it  constantly,  the  necessity  of  preferring  the  interests  o 
the  soul  to  the  body,  and  the  things  of  eternity  to  those 
of  time.  Thus  may  you  expect,  that  you  will  be  mutually 
blessed  in  the  present  life,  and  become  to  each  other 
crowns  of  rejoicing  on  the  day  of  the  Lord. 

"  To  those  children  who  have  been  devoted  to  God  in 
their  infancy,  permit  us  to  say : — You  have  abundant 
cause  of  gratitude,  when  you  think  how  highly  yoiv  have 
been  distinguished  above  many  around  you.  If  your  pa- 
rents, in  the  act  of  your  consecration,  had  right  views 
and  exercises,  they  must  have  felt  a  deep  and  prayerful 
solicitude  for  your  future  and  eternal  welfare.  They  not 
only  vowed,  but  determined  in  humble  reliance  on  the 
grace  and  promises  of  God,  to  watch  over  you,  to  in- 
struct and  admonish  you  and  to  bring  you  up  as  disciples 
27* 


318  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

of  the  Saviour.  What  profit,  my  young  friends,  have 
you  derived  from  their  pious  teachings  and  counsels,  from 
their  entreaties  and  prayers  ?  Have  you  fulfilled  the  ex- 
pectations and  desires  of  their  hearts,  by  walking  in  the 
paths  of  virtue  and  religion?  'A  wise  son  maketh  a 
glad  father :  but  a  foolish  son  is  the  heaviness  of  his  mo- 
ther.' O  beware  then  of  embittering  the  life  of  your  pa- 
rents, either  by  your  indifference  about  religion  or  by 
profligate  conduct :  beware  of  disturbing  the  serenity  of 
their  dying  moments,  and  of  preventing  them  from 
closing  their  eyes  in  peace  and  triumph.  Beware  lest 
your  signal  blessings  should  at  last  prove  a  curse,  and 
the  privileges  with  which  you  are  exalted  unto  heaven, 
should  tend  only  to  sink  you  deeper  into  the  burning 
abyss. 

"Let  us  all  endeavor  to  have  our  religion  seated  prin- 
cipally in  the  heart,  and  never  depend  on  any  outward 
form  as  the  ground  of  our  eternal  hopes.  Let  us  live 
upon  the  great  fundamentals  of  Christianity,  and  make  it 
our  daily  and  highest  concern  to  exemplify  their  power 
in  all  our  conversation  and  actions.  For  want  of  atten- 
tion to  these  weightier  matters  of  the  law,  it  was  that  the 
Jews  came  short  of  heaven,  though  they  were  all  the 
children  of  Abraham,  and  subjects  of  the  covenant  and 
promise.  If  therefore  you  suppose,  that  you  must  ne- 
cessarily be  Christians,  because  you  have  been  born  of 
Christian  parents,  and  received  the  seal  of  the  covenant, 
you  are  under  the  same  awful  delusion  and  will  meet 
with  the  same  disappointment  and  doom.  The  carnal 
descendants  of  Abraham  perished  without  remedy,  and 
so  must  all,  notwithstanding  their  baptism,  perish  with- 
out remedy  and  without  hope,  who  have  not  been  born 
again  by  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God.     '  He  is  not  a  Chris- 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  319 

tian  who  is  one  outwardly,  neither  is  that  baptism  which 
is  outward  in  the  flesh;  but  he  is  a  Christian  who  is  one 
inwardly,  and  baptism  is  that  of  the  heart,  in  the  spirit 
and  not  in  the  letter,  whose  praise  is  not  of  men,  but  of 
God.'  '" 

It  is  a  subject  of  deep  and  serious  regret,  that  in  a  land 
of  gospel  privileges,  where  there  are  so  many  opportuni- 
ties to  become  wise  unto  salvation,  and  Christ's  ministers 
so  frequently  urge  upon  the  rising  generation,  the  neces- 
sity of  making  a  public  profession  of  religion,  and  of 
renewing  the  seal  of  God's  covenant  with  his  people  by 
confirmation,  there  should  still  be  so  many  who,  either 
ignorant  or  regardless  of  their  duty,  are  members  of  no 
particular  denomination.  This  lamentable  defection  is 
attributable  in  part,  to  the  mistaken  views  entertained  by 
thousands  respecting  the  relation  in  which  their  baptism, 
or  rather  the  covenant  of  grace,  of  which  baptism  is  the 
seal,  has  placed  them.  "We  cannot  now,"  they  say, 
"join  the  church  or  submit  to  confirmation,  because  we 
are  not  prepared  ;  or  we  dread  the  assumption  of  such 
solemn  responsibilities,"  &c.  But  it  should  be  remem- 
bered, beloved  readers,  that  we  do  not  ask  you  to  join 
the  church,  or  take  upon  yourselves  the  duties  of  church- 
membership.  This  has  already  been  done.  You  were 
in  fact  bor7i  into  the  church  without  your  consent,  just 
as,  without  any  agency  of  your  own,  you  were  born  free 
citizens  of  the  state ;  you  were  embraced  in  God's  cove- 
nant evening  before  you  entered  upon  your  existence ; 
the  duties  of  church-membership  are  therefore  already 
upon  you,  and  you  cannot  escape  without  actually  re- 
nouncing them.  At  your  baptism  your  birth-right  was 
impressively  certified,  and  your  participation  in  God's 

'Cliristian  Baptism  by  a  Minister  of  the  Ger.  Reformed  church. 


320  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

covenant  was  ratified  and  openly  announced ;  and  hence 
you  are  already  members  of  the  church  of  God,  and  re- 
quire not  to  be  transferred  to  this  relation  by  a  public 
profession  or  by  the  rite  of  confirmation. 

A  profession  is  indeed  indispensably  necessary,  but 
upon  grounds  very  diff'erent  from  that  implied  in  your 
objection.  Christ  expressly  commands  'you  to  confess 
him  before  the  ivorld,  and  declares  that  if  you  refuse  or 
neglect  to  do  so,  he  will  deny  you  before  his  Father  and 
his  holy  angels.  Besides,  the  profession  made  in  your 
name  at  your  baptism,  whereby  your  membership  was 
solemnly  attested,  was  made  by  your  parents  and  spon- 
sors, and  now,  having  arrived  at  a  proper  age  to  act  for 
yourselves,  it  is  of  the  highest  importance  that  you  should 
publicly  and  voluntarily  acquiesce  in  it ;  nor  can  any 
well-regulated  Christian  denomination  admit  you  to  the 
full  enjoyment  of  church  privileges,  unless  you  do  thus 
acquiesce. 

Accordingly,  in  addressing  those  who  have  not  yet  en- 
tered into  communion  with  any  Christian  denomination, 
we  propose  not  the  question :  will  you  join  the  church 
of  God;  will  you  become  subjects  of  his  cov^enant ;  will 
you  consent  to  become  members  of  his  visible  kingdom 
and  assume  the  responsibility  connected  with  that  rela- 
tion ?  Far  from  it ;  all  this,  as  already  observed,  has 
been  done.  You  are  already  committed  on  the  side  of 
Christ ;  the  vows  of  God  are  already  irrevocably  upon 
you,  and  the  covenant  has  been  solemnly  recognized. 
All  the  powers  of  earth  and  all  the  ingenuity  of  infideli- 
ty, cannot  absolve  you  from  the  obligations  belonging  to 
the  position  you  occupy  in  reference  to  Messiah's  king- 
dom. No,  the  question  wears  this  aspect,  and  none 
other :    Will  you  renounce  your  membership ;    are  you 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  321 

prepared  to  become  recreant  to  the  church  to  which  your 
souls  have  been  espoused ;  are  you  willing  to  be  ranked 
among  backsliders  and  apostates  ;  have  you  made  up  your 
mind  to  annul  the  "  everlasting  covenant,"  and  can  you 
deliberately  consent  to  be  "  cut  off  from  God's  people  ;" 
which  is  the  penalty  denounced,  and  necessarily  incurred 
by  a  neglect  personally  to  renew  and  confirm  the  covenant 
in  question  ? — You  may  refuse  formally  to  come  out 
from  the  world,  and  to  renew  the  profession  made  at 
baptism ;  but  this  will  not  diminish  the  amount  of  your 
duties  or  the  weight  of  your  responsibility ;  on  the  con- 
trary, it  will  stamp  upon  your  souls, — deeply  and  per- 
haps indelibly,  the  foul  blot  of  apostacy !  it  will  mark 
you  as  recreants  to  the  cause  to  which  you  have  been 
solemnly  consecrated,  and  as  traitors  to  the  gracious  cove- 
nant by  virtue  of  which  alone  you  can  ever  expect  to  be 
saved  !  A  man  who  attempts  to  apologize  for  his  omis- 
sion to  make  a  profession  of  religion  and  personally  to 
confirm  his  baptismal  engagements,  does  in  effect  say  to' 
Jehovah :  I  am  indeed,  by  grace,  a  member  of  thy  church ; 
all  the  duties  of  discipleship  are  incumbent  upon  me  ;  in 
virtue  of  my  birth  I  belong  to  thy  gracious  covenant,  and 
I  stand  pledged  to  believe  in  thy  well-beloved  Son  for 
salvation,  to  renounc'e  Satan,  the  world  and  sin,  and  walk 
in  all  the  ways  of  thy  commandments.  But  I  now  delib- 
erately renounce  the  church  and  all  its  privileges  and 
blessings  ;  I  abjure  the  covenant  of  God  with  his  people, 
and  the  promises  of  mercy  and  eternal  life  comprehended 
in  it ;  I  annul  and  wilfully  cast  from  me  the  entire  spirit- 
ual and  religious  relation  into  which  I  have  been  brought 
by  grace,  and  set  up  for  myself  independently  of  God, 
and  in  opposition  to  his  plan  of  salvation ;  I  sever  my- 
self from  God  s  people  ;  I  cut  loose  from  the  great  sheet- 


322  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

anchor  of  hope ;  I  abandon but  we  forbear,  we  can 

pursue  the  awful  subject  no  further;  our  heart  within  us 
grows  faint  and  sick,  while  we  contemplate  the  daring 
presumption  and  enormous  guilt  of  those,  who  esteem 
their  privileges  so  lightly,  and  thus  stretch  out  their  hand 
against  God  and  strengthen  themselves  against  the  Al- 
mighty. 

Would  to  God,  that  all  those  who  are  standing  aloof 
from  their  duty  in  this  respect,  would  take  this  view  of 
the  subject !  would,  that  they  could  realize  the  true  rela- 
tion they  sustain  to  Jehovah,  and  the  actual  ground  they 
assume  in  refusing  to  profess  Christ  before  the  world,  and 
to  incur  personally  the  obligations  of  church-member- 
ship ;  we  are  persuaded  they  would  then  act  differently. 
The  old  plea  :  "I  am  not  prepared  to  join  the  church  ;  I 
cannot  enter  upon  so  solemn  and  responsible  a  relation," 
&c.,  would  no  longer  be  relied  upon;  its  fallacy  would  be 
seen  and  felt,  and,  ashamed  of  the  base  ingratitude  and 
folly  involved  in  il,  they  would  perhaps  awake  to  their 
duty  or  be  compelled  to  seek  refuge  under  shelter  of  a 
more  specious  apology. 

Young  men  and  Avomen  !  remember,  we  beseech  you 
that  you  are  not  your  own  ;  you  are  bought  ivith  a  price 
and  therefore  bound  to  glorify  Gdd  with  your  bodies 
and  spirits,  ivhich  are  his ;  bear  in  mind  that  you  are 
Jehovah's  own  rightful  property,  not  only  by  creation 
and  redemption,  but  also  and  emphatically  by  a  cove- 
nant-transfer; the  God  of  Israel  stipulated  for  your  ser- 
vices with  faithful  old  Abraham,  when  he  condescended 
to  enter  into  solemn  league  with  that  pious  and  distin- 
guished patriarch  ;  the  promise  attached  to  that  agree- 
ment, had  respect  not  only  to  him  and  his  immediate  pos- 
terity, but  also  "  to  all  who  were  afar  off,  even  as  many 


MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  323 

as  the  Lord  our  God  should  call ;'"  he  has  called  you 
by  the  gospel,  and  hence  the  blessings  of  the  covenant 
appertain  to  you.  When  you  first  opened  your  eyes 
upon  the  world,  you  did  so  as  subjects  of  that  covenant ; 
you  did  so  as  members  of  the  church  of  God ;  accord- 
ingly, in  due  season  the  covenant  was  sealed  and  certi- 
fied in  baptism  ;  your  membership  in  the  church  was  thus 
made  known  and  acceded  to.  Away  then,  with  every 
idle  subterfuge,  and  with  all  the  miserable  excuses  with 
which  you  have  heretofore  sought  to  justify  or  extenuate 
your  neglect  of  duty,  and  attempt  no  longer  to  undo  what 
God  has  already  done  ;  spurn  not  your  blood-bought,  in- 
estimable birthright ;  renounce  not  the  church  of  God  in 
which  you  were  born ;  be  not  apostates  from  the  cove- 
nant so  rich  in  love  and  mercy,  in  virtue  of  which  alone 
remission  of  sins  and  eternal  life  can  be  obtained  ! — O  re- 
member your  Creator  now  in  the  days  of  your  youth ; — 
seek  the  Lord  in  brokenness  of  heart  and  contrition  of  spirit ; 
seek  him  in  true  faith  on  the  Saviour  of  a  lost  and  perish- 
ing world; — seek  him  thus,  while  he  may  be  found;  seek 
him  now,  even  this  very  moment,  lest  it  be  eternally  too 

late ;  and  profess  him  cheerfully,  gratefully,  and  consist- 
ently in  the  face  of  a  gainsaying  and  ungodly  world,  lay- 
ing claim  to  all  the  blessings,  and  honors,  and  super- 
abounding  riches  of  grace,  appertaining  to  your  covenant 
relation.  And  thus,  though  your  life  may  be  accounted 
madness,  and  your  end  to  be  without  honor,  yet  shall 
you  be  numbered  among  the  children  of  God,  and  have 
your  lot  forever  among  his  saints. 

'Gen.  xvii.  7,  compared  with  Acts  ii.  39. 


APPENDIX 


ESSAYS  ON  SEVERAL  SUBJECTS 

CONNECTED  WITH  BAPTISM. 
No.  I. 

WHY    A    NAME    IS    GIVEN    AT    BAPTISM. 

A  NAME  is  an  appellation  attached  to  a  person  or  thing;  or 
it  is  that  by  which  an  object  is  designated,  to  distinguish  it 
from  another.  To  give  a  name  is  a  token  of  authority ;  thus 
a  father  gives  names  to  his  children,  and  a  master  to  his  ser- 
vants. So  also  Adam  gave  names  to  all  the  animals,  thereby 
indicating  that  they  were  in  some  sense  placed  under  his  do- 
minion. 

When  God  gave  a  name  to  an  individual  or  changed  it,  he 
thereby  signified  that,  that  individual  belonged  to  him  in  an 
especial  manner,  was  taken  under  his  peculiar  care  and  ap- 
pointed to  some  particular  purpose.  Thus  he  gave  names, 
even  before  their  birth,  to  Jedidiah  or  Solomon,  the  Messiah, 
John  the  Baptizer,  &;c.  When  he  selected  Ahram  with  a  view 
to  claim  him  as  his  peculiar  servant,  to  enter  into  a  covenant 
of  grace  with  him,  and  through  him  to  accomplish  a  great  pur- 
pose, he  changed  his  name  to  Abraham.  Hebrew  and  Greek 
names,  have  a  meaning,  and  when  given  or  changed  on  divine 
authority,  their  import  always  corresponded  with  some  promi- 
nent feature  in  the  character  of  the  individual,  or  with  some 
important  purpose  for  which  he  was  set  apart.  The  name 
Alrruham  implies  the  fathtr  uf  a  great  multitude ;  accordingly 
28 


326  APPENDIX. 

when  God  covenanted  with  him,  he  said: — "Behold,  my 
covenant  is  with  thee,  and  thou  shalt  be  a  father  of  many 
nations.  Neither  shall  thy  name  any  more  be  called  Abram, 
but  thy  name  shall  be  called  Abraham,  for  a  father  of  many 
nations  have  I  made  thee.  This  is  my  covenant  which  ye 
shall  keep,  between  me  and  you  and  thy  seed  after  thee ;  every 
man-child  among  you  shall  be  circumcised.  In  the  self-same 
day  was  Abraham  circumcised,  as  God  had  said  unto  him." — 
Genesis  xvii.  4,  5,  10,  and  26. 

Jesus  means  Saviour,  and  hence  this  very  appropriate  name 
was  given  to  our  Lord.  Saul  was  changed  to  Paul;  the  former 
signifies  sepulchre,  destroyer-, — an  appellation  quite  expressive 
of  the  work  of  destruction  in  which  that  determined  perse- 
cutor was  engaged  prior  to  his  conversion ;  the  latter  implies 
a  worker,  answering  admirably  to  the  subsequent  character  of 
that  same  man,  who  could  truly  say:  "but  I  labored  more 
abundantly  than  they  all." 

It  is  well  known  that  circumcision  was  the  sign  and  seal  of 
a  covenant  with  God;  in  that  rite  God's  authority  over  the 
individual  circumcised,  his  favor  and  mercy  towards  him  and 
his  appointment  of  him  to  a  particular  purpose,  were  marked 
and  formally  recognized.  Hence  it  was  customary  among 
the  Jews  to  give  names  at  circumcision,  thereby  betokening 
more  fully  the  very  thing  represented  by  the  rite.  Thus,  when 
Abraham  covenanted  with  Jehovah  and  acknowledged  his  en- 
tire subjection  to  him  by  submitting  to  circumcision,  his  name 
was  changed.  The  following  examples  reflect  additional  light 
on  this  subject. 

"And  it  came  to  pass  that  on  the  eighth  day  they  came  to 
circumcise  the  child,  and  they  called  him  Zacharias — Luke  i. 
69—63. 

"  And  when  the  eight  days  were  accomplished  for  the  cir- 
cumcising of  the  child,  his  name  was  called  Jesus Luke 

ii.  21. 

"And  when  Jesus  beheld  him  he  said,  thou  art  Simon  the 
son  of  Jona:  thou  shalt  be  called  Cephas,  which  is,  Peter. — 
John  i.  42.     Lvike  vi.  14. 

"  Saul  who  is  also  called  Paul.     Acts  xiii.  9. 
"  Joses,  by  the   apostles  was  suniamed   Barnabas. — Acts 
iv.  36. 

These  remarks  being  premised,  the  practice  of  giving  a 
name  at  baptism  is  easily  accounted  for.  Baptism  has  come 
in  the  place  of  circumcision ;  it  is  in  like  manner  an  ordinance 
in  which  God's  covenant  of  grace  is  sealed,  and  whereby  we 
acknowledge  his  authority  over  us  and  his  claim  to  our  service 
and  obedience;  and  he  on  his  part  assures  us  of  his  favor, 
owns  us  as  his  children  and  appoints  us  to  purposes  of  love 


APPENDIX.  32T 

and  mercy.  Hence  there  is  a  propriety  in  giving  a  name  at 
baptism ;  the  very  idea  which  it  indicates  falls  in  with  one  of 
the  designs  of  this  ordinance ;  it  may  also,  in  a  sense,  be  said 
to  be  in  accordance  with  divine  example  in  reference  to  Abra- 
ham, Christ,  John  and  others,  and  is  evidently  a  usage  that 
has  been  transmitted  to  us  from  remote  antiquity. 

Another  consideration  which  shows  the  propriety  of  this 
practice  is  the  fact,  that  the  individual  baptized  is  recognized 
as  a  member  of  the  church.  Of  course  he  is  entitled  to 
church-privileges,  according  to  his  capacity  to  enjoy  them;  if 
he  is  an  adult,  all  the  privileges  of  full  communion  belong  to 
him ;  if  a  child,  only  such  as  progressively  appertain  to  infant- 
membership.  It  is  therefore  obvious  that  the  individual  thus 
recognized  should  be  announced  to  the  church  under  some 
name,  so  that  he  may  be  distinguished  from  others,  and  under 
his  own  name  and  in  his  own  proper  person,  receive  the  privi- 
leges and  treatment  due  him  from  the  church.  It  would  be  un- 
reasonable as  well  as  inconvenient  to  acknowledge  a  nameless 
person  as  a  member  of  any  society. 

Further,  the  rules  of  the  church  demand,  that  a  record  should 
be  kept  in  the  regular  church-book  of  the  baptism  of  every 
member.  This  record  presupposes  a  name  ;  what  kind  of  a 
registry  of  members  would  that  be,  in  which  they  could  not  be 
distinguished  by  appropriate  designations'?  In  some  countries 
the  civil  authority  requires  such  a  record,  and  it  is  in  various 
respects  important  that  it  should  be  attended  to,  and  hence  we 
have  an  additional  reason  for  giving  a  name  at  an  early  period 
in  life. 

We  should  however  guard  against  gliding  into  an  error  on 
this  subject.  As  the  announcing  of  a  name  was  in  no  sense  a 
necessary  part  of  circumcision,  so  it  is  not  of  baptism ;  if  ad- 
ministered without  a  name,  it  is  in  every  respect  as  valid  as 
when  one  is  given,  hence  the  name  appropriated  to  a  person  at 
baptism  may  be  subsequently  altered  if  circumstances  render 
it  necessary.  But  this  should  not  be  done  hastily  nor  without 
substantial  grounds.  No  good  end  could  result  from  frequent 
alterations,  and  much  confusion  and  even  serious  mischief 
would  unavoidably  ensue.  The  name  adopted  at  baptism  and 
entered  into  the  church-protocol,  should  therefore  be  invariably 
retained  except  in  special  cases  of  sufficient  importance  to  jus- 
tify a  change.  If  the  record  of  the  name  be  a  matter  of  legal 
requirement,  we  have  no  right  to  alter  it,  unless  authorized  by 
a  special  act  of  the  legislature.  Being  enrolled  in  the  appro- 
priate civil  registry,  the  name  has  become  the  property  of  the 
State,  and  cannot  be  aJjandoned  or  exchanged  for  another  ex.- 
cept  by  permission  of  the  State. 


328  APPENDIX. 

No.  II. 

SPONSORS   AT   BAPTISM. 

Sponsors  are  persons  who  by  appointment  are  present  ar; 
baptism,  to  witness  the  ceremony  and  answer  for  the  individual 
baptized,  and  thus  become  sureties  for  his  future  religioua 
education.  This  we  presume  is  a  correct  definition  of  the  term, 
according-  to  its  common  acceptation ;  but  it  does  not  compre- 
hend one  of  the  principal  designs  contemplated  by  sponsors 
in  the  Lutheran  church.  By  an  examination  of  a  number 
of  ancient  Lutheran  liturgies,  we  find  that  god-parents  were 
required  to  be  present  at  baptism  as  representatives  of  the 
church,  to  acknowledge  in  its  name,  the  baptized  child,  as  a 
member  of  the  church,  and,  as  intermediate  persons,  to  form 
the  cord  of  union  and  Christian  fellowship  between  the  parties. 
It  was  on  this  ground  that  parents  were  not  deemed  suitable 
persons  to  act  as  sponsors ; — it  being  their  office  to  dedicate 
the  child,  it  was  thought  inconsistent  for  the  same  persons  to 
act  in  the  double  capacity  of  offering  their  child  to  the  church 
and  also  of  receiving  the  offering. 

Some  very  respectable  writers  maintain,  that  the  practice  of 
having  sponsors  was  introduced  at  a  very  early  age.  It  is 
well  known  that  the  primitive  Christians  were  violently  perse- 
cuted and  in  numerous  instances  barbarously  put  to  death;  it 
therefore  seemed  necessary  that  others  besides  the  parents, 
should  be  witnesses  at  baptism,  who  in  case  of  the  death  of 
the  parents,  might  attest  the  fact,  and  if  necessary,  provide  for 
the  religious  education  of  the  babtized.  This  design  of  spon-. 
sors  accords  well  with  the  opinion  of  those  who  think  they 
can  trace  the  practice  as  far  back  as  the  second  centu  y. 

Others  are  of  opinion  that  there  is  no  historical  evidence 
whatever,  that  children  were  presented  for  baptism  within  the 
first  five  or  six  centuries,  by  any  other  persons  than  their  pa- 
rents, unless  the  parents  were  dead  or  had  not  embraced  the 
Christian  religion.  A  very  learned  Episcopal  divine,  who 
carefully  examined  the  subject,  and  was  exceedingly  anxious 
to  fix  the  introduction  of  sponsors  at  the  earliest  possible  peri- 
od, acknowledged  that  in  the  first  centuries,  none  but  parents 
were  the  presenters  and  sureties  for  their  own  children,  except 
in  extraordinary  cases,  as  for  example,  when  the  parents  were 
not  living,  or  were  not  professing  Christians  ;  when  they  cru- 
elly forsook  and  exposed  their  offspring ;  and  when  masters 
had  young  slaves  committed  to  their  charge.'  Augustine  who 
flourished  toward  the  close  of  the  fourth  and  beginning  of  the 
fifth  century,  maintained  that  parents  ought  to  act  as  sponsors 

3ee  Bingham's  Ecclesiastical  Antiquities. 


APPENDIX.  329 

for  their  own  children,  except  in  extraordinary  cases,  viz.  such 
as  have  just  been  mentioned  ;  and  added,  that  in  those  cases 
any  professing  Christians  who  should  be  willing  to  undertake 
the  benevolent  charge,  might  with  propriety,  take  such  chil- 
dren, offer  them  in  baptism,  and  become  responsible  for  their 
Christian  education.  The  writings  of  several  of  the  fathers  are 
sometimes  quoted  as  affording  evidence  in  favor  of  the  use  of 
sponsors  in  early  times;  but  those  who  have  gone  to  the 
trouble  of  examining  them  most  carefully,  assure  us  that  they 
have  not  written  a  sentence  which  sustains  the  idea  that  any 
others  acted  as  sponsors  but  parents,  provided  they  were  in  life 
and  were  of  a  proper  character  to  perform  the  office.  The  tes- 
timony _of  Dionysius,  which  is  more  favorable  than  that  of 
others  to  the  early  use  of  sponsors  other  than  parents,  relates 
only  to  cases  in  which  the  children  of  pagans  or  unbelieving 
parents  were  to  be  trained  up  to  the  Christian  religion.  It 
must  also  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  writings  of  Dionysius  are 
entitled  to  no  credit,  as  they  are  regarded  by  the  most  learned 
as  "a  gross  and  impudent  forgery." 

Sponsors  in  cases  of  adult  baptism,  appear  to  have  been  in- 
troduced in  the  fifth  century ;  but  they  were  employed  only 
under  peculiar  circumstances;  for  example,  when  the  adult 
was  dumb,  or  in  a  state  of  delirium  and  could  not  answer  for 
himself.  On  such  occasions  the  sponsors  testified  to  the  good 
character  of  the  candidate  and  the  fact  that  he  was  really  anx- 
ious to  receive  baptism.  Subsequently  the  practice  became 
universal,  still  the  adults  always  entered  into  the  engagements 
themselves,  provided  they  were  not  incapacitated  by  physical 
or  mental  imbecility.  The  sponsors  at  adult  baptism  were 
usually  the  officers  of  the  church,  and  were  looked  upon  as  the 
guardians  of  the  religious  life  of  the  persons  baptized. 

In  the  ninth  century,  the  church  of  Rome  prohibited  parents 
to  act  as  sponsors  for  their  own  children,  and  required  this 
duty  to  be  yielded  up  to  others  ; — certainly  a  most  arbitrary 
and  unrighteous  requisition. 

Among  the  Waldenses  and  Albigenses  the  parents  usually 
stood  as  sponsors  for  their  own  offspring,  though  other  pious 
persons  were  not  prohibited  from  performing  this  office,  at 
least  when  the  parents  were  dead  or  absent  or  for  some  other 
reason  could  not  attend  to  it  themselves. 

The  church  of  England  and  also  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
church  in  this  country,  require  god-parents  in  all  cases  of 
baptism,  adults  as  well  as  infants.  In  the  former  the  parents 
are  not  permitted  to  stand  as  sponsors,  nor  even  urged  to  be 
present  at  the  baptism  of  their  child. 

The  Lutheran  church  in  the  United  States,  as  on  several 
other  points  of  doctrine  and  practice,  so  also  on  this  subject, 
occupy  middle  ground.     Indeed,  a  comparative  view  of  her 
28* 


330  APPENDIX. 

principles  and  usages  place  her  in  this  relative  position  in  a 
variety  of  respects,  as  though  her  ruling  maxim  had  been, 
Ibis  tutissimus  in  medio.  We  require  the  parents  to  be  present 
at  the  baptism  of  their  children  if  practicable,  and  always  ad- 
vise them  to  act  as  sponsors;  at  the  same  time,  if  desired,  we 
admit  other  sponsors  in  connection  with  them,  but  avail  our- 
selves of  every  suitable  occasion  to  discourage  it.  As  the 
church-records  attest  the  fact  of  baptism,  and  it  is  the  ac- 
knowledged and  solemn  duty  of  the  church  to  make  provision 
for  the  Christian  education  of  her  young  members,  especially 
if  they  be  orphans  or  destitute,  we  consider  that  these  objects 
of  sponsors,  other  than  parents,  are  sufficiently  provided  for. 
As  to  representatives  of  the  church  to  acknowledge  in  its  name 
the  membership  of  the  baptized  child  ;  we  think,  that  while 
the  parents  dedicate  it  to  the  Lord,  the  church  is  amply  repre- 
sented by  the  officiating  minister.  But  there  are  other  consid- 
erations that  have  operated  upon  our  churches  in  determining 
them  to  resist  this  practice.  The  pledges  made  at  baptism  in 
behalf  of  the  child,  are  such  as  none  but  parents  are  for  the  most 
part  qualified  to  redeem,  and  hence  it  most  becomes  them  to 
enter  into  those  pledges.  IVIoreover,  the  use  of  sponsors,  how- 
ever necessary  at  first,  however  laudable  the  original  design, 
and  however  faithfully  their  duties  may  have  been  observed, 
has  in  too  many  instances  deteriorated  into  an  unmeaning  and 
thoughtless  and  even  sinful  habit.  Solemn  engagements  are 
made  which  are  rarely  if  ever  fufilled,  nay  scarcely  afterwards 
thought  of,  and  which  indeed  those  who  make  them  have 
neither  intention  nor  opportunity  to  discharge.  Thus  the 
practice  has  sadly  degenerated,  and  cannot  in  such  cases  be 
regarded  by  the  Searcher  of  hearts  otherwise  than  as  odious 
and  culpable.  For  these  reasons  several  of  our  synods  have 
publicly  expressed  their  disapprobation  of  it,  in  ordinary  cases, 
and  we  rejoice  to  say  that  it  is  rapidlj'  disappearing.  We 
must  however  here  remark,  that  as  cur  churches  are  in  a  sense 
indepeiident,  and  claim  the  right  of  observing  such  usages  as 
they  deem  most  subservient  to  general  edification,  especially 
in  matters  not  essential,  our  statements  may  not  strictly  apply 
to  every  individual  church  and  minister  belonging  to  our  com- 
munity ;  but  in  general  we  think  they  will  not  be  found  to  be 
materially  erroneous. 

The  views  and  usages  of  the  German  Reformed  church  on 
this  subject,  bear  so  strong  a  resemblance  to  those  of  the  Lu- 
therans, that  these  observations  are  perhaps  equally  applicable 
to  it. 

The  conclusions  which  we  draw  from  the  preceding  remarks, 
are  the  following : 

1.  The  use  of  sponsors  other  than  parents,  is  not  a  ecriptural 
regulation. 


APPENDIX.  331 

2.  It  did  not  exist  on  ordinary  occasions,  in  the  earliest  and 
purest  age  of  the  church. 

3.  It  is  productive  of  very  little  if  any  good,  as  practised  in 
the  present  day,  and  is  calculated  to  occasion  much  evil. 

4.  The  design  of  sponsors  is  amply  provided  for  by  the 
present  regulations  of  the  church  in  Christian  countries. 

5.  Parents  are  decidedly  the  most  suitable  persons  to  stand 
as  sponsors  for  their  own  children,  but  they  ought  certainly  to 
be  pious. 

6.  If  the  parents  are  dead  or  absent,  or  insane,  or  are  pagans, 
or  live  in  vice  and  immorality,  or  on  some  other  account  are 
disqualified  to  act  in  that  capacity,  then  others  should  supply 
tlieir  place,  but  their  substitutes  should  be  professing  Christians. 

7.  When  adults  are  baptized,  they  should  always  answer  for 
themselves  ;  but  if  they  are  dumb,  or  of  very  feeble  capacity 
and  therefore  in  need  of  spiritual  guardians,  then  it  is  proper 
for  some  Christian  friend  or  friends  to  become  their  sponsors. 

If  in  view  of  the  foregoing  conclusions  it  should  be  asked, 
whether  the  children  of  all  Christians  or  baptized  parents 
ought  to  be  baptized  %  We  answer  in  the  affirmative.  The 
practice  of  circumcision  among  the  Jews  was  universal  ;  and 
though  it  was  the  duty  of  every  Jew  to  be  a  sincere  worshipper 
of  the  true  God,  yet  many  were  not,  "  they  were  not  all  Israel 
who  were  of  Israel ;"  still  we  have  no  evidence  that  any  chil- 
dren were  excluded  from  circumcision,  unless  their  parents 
were  excommunicated.  So  also  the  children  of  all  Christian 
parents  should  receive  baptism  ;  being  born  in  the  church,  just 
as  they  are  born  citizens  of  the  state,  they  are  undoubtedly  en- 
titled to  the  formal  recognition  of  their  membership.  If  both 
their  parents  are  infidels  or  pagans,  and  have  thus  either  re- 
nounced or  never  embraced  the  Christian  system,  the  case  is 
different.  But  even  in  this  event,  if  a  Christian  friend  should 
kindly  adopt  them  into  his  family,  or  consent  to  stand  as 
sponsor  and  become  surety  for  their  religious  education,  they 
also,  by  virtue  of  this  connection  would  have  an  equal  claim, 
through  the  merits  of  Christ,  to  the  seal  of  the  covenant.  But 
while  we  contend  for  the  universality  of  infant  baptism  under 
tlie  specified  limitations,  we  cannot  admit  that  all  baptized 
parents  are  qualified  to  stand  as  sponsors.  Such  as  habitually 
violate  their  own  baptismal  vows  and  set  at  defiance  the  au- 
thority of  God  and  the  church,  and  of  course  have  forfeited 
their  membership,  are  certainly  not  fit  and  suitable  persons  to 
enter  into  those  solemn  engagements  in  behalf  of  their  children, 
which  baptism  involves.  How  can  parents  of  this  description 
sincerely  dedicate  their  children  to  the  pure  and  sacred  service 
of  God  ] — how,  consistently  obligate  themselves  to  "  bring 
them  up  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord  V  Is  there 
no  incongruity, — nothing  like  gross  hypocrisy  in  such  a  pro- 


332  APPENDIX. 

cedure  !  Does  not  every  formula  of  baptism  that  has  ever  been 
published  in  the  Lutheran  church,  whether  in  Europe  or  Amer- 
ica, require  those  who  present  the  child  for  baptism,  to  re- 
nounce in  its  name,  the  devil  and  all  his  works  and  ways,  to 
profess  faith  in  the  divine  authority  of  the  Christian  religion, 
and  to  engage  to  use  all  necessary  care  and  diligence  by  in- 
struction, admonition,  example  and  discipline  to  train  him  up 
in  the  fear  of  the  Lord?  Now,  is  it  not  expected  that  this  re- 
nunciation^ profession,  and  engagement,  should  be  sincere  ?  If 
not,  the  whole  transaction  is  a  solemn  mockery  ,-  but  if  it  is, 
then  we  submit  it  to  the  decision  of  any  enlightened  and  un- 
prejudiced mind,  whether  ungodly  parents,  are  qualified  to 
perform  the  office  of  sponsors  ? 

What  then,  under  such  circumstances,  is  the  proper  course 
of  procedure  ]  We  answer,  if  either  of  the  parents  afford  evi- 
dence of  a  sincere  profession  of  Christianity,  let  that  parent 
only,  answer  for  the  child  ;  but  if  both  are  still  "  in  the  gall 
of  bitterness  and  in  the  bond  of  iniquity,"  it  does  not  appear 
to  us  that  the  ordinance  can  be  consistently  administered,  or 
its  engagements  be  faithfully  entered  into,  unless  some  Chris- 
tian friend  will  kindly  consent  to  act  as  sponsor.  Some  minis- 
ters, feeling  the  force  of  this  view  of  the  subject,  have  endea- 
vored to  escape  the  charge  of  inconsistency,  and  of  tempting 
ungodly  parents  hypocritically  to  bind  themselves  by  vows 
which  they  neither  intend  nor  are  capable  to  perform,  by  omit- 
ting to  propose  the  usual  questions  prescribed  in  the  formulary 
of  the  rite ;  they  think  they  pursue  the  safest  course  by  admin- 
istering baptism  without  requiring  the  customary  renunciation, 
profession  and  engagements.  But  does  it  not  follow,  that  in 
such  cases,  it  is  not  upon  a  profession  of  Christianity  that  the 
child  is  baptized,  for  there  is  no  profession  made;  and  does 
not  this  conflict  with  the  very  nature  of  the  ordinance,  and  with 
all  the  examples  of  its  administration  recorded  in  the  New 
Testament  ]  If  they  however  have  the  approbation  of  their 
own  conscience,  we  shall  not  condemn  them  ;  but  we  would 
respectfully  suggest,  whether  it  would  not  be  highly  proper  to 
avail  themselves  of  such  occasions  to  administer  a  solemn  re- 
proof and  a  pungent  exhortation  to  those  who  wickedly  under- 
take to  covenant  with  God  for  their  own  children,  while  they 
themselves  are  living  in  rebellion  against  him  ■?  and  if  so,  they 
will  find  an  appropriate  text  in  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth 
verses  of  the  fiftieth  Psalm  :  "But  unto  the  wicked  God  saith, 
what  hast  thou  to  do  *  *  *  that  thou  shouldst  take  my  cove- 
nant in  thy  mouth  ]  Seeing  thou  hatest  instruction,  and  castest 
my  words  behind  thee." 


APPENDIX.  333 

No.  III. 
CONFIRMATION. 

THE   NATURE   AND   DESIGN   OF   CONFIRMATION. 

Confirmation  is  a  solemn  and  religious  rite,  observed  by 
the  great  body  of  the  Christian  chuich,  but  is  not  regarded  in 
the  same  light  by  the  several  denominations  among  whom  it  is 
practised. 

The  churches  that  reject  this  rite,  constitute,  comparatively 
speakino",  but  a  small  ininority.  Besides  the  Lutherans,  it  is 
held  in  high  estimation  in  the  German  Reformed,  Protestant 
Episcopal,  Bohemian,  Moravian,  Roman  Catholic,  Greek,  and 
some  other  churches.  Even  those  who  have  hitherto  looked 
upon  it  with  an  evil  eye,  are  beginning  to  discern  its  advan- 
tages, and  to  speak  of  it  in  commendatory  terms.' 

The  Roman  Catholics  rank  confirmation  among  the  sacra- 
ments, but  there  is  no  scriptural  warrant  to  justify  this  view 
of  it,  especially  as  it  was  not  instituted  by  Christ,  which  is 
deemed  an  essential  constituent  of  a  sacrament. 

Our  brethren  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  church  consider 
it,  not  indeed  as  a  sacrament,  but  as  a  divine  ordinance,  which 
according  to  their  opinion,  was  instituted  and  practised  by  the 
apostles.  They  think  it  probable  that  our  Lord,  during  the 
forty  days  that  he  conversed  with  his  apostles  after  his  resur- 
rection, instructed  them  to  institute  it. 

Our  Presbyterian  brethren  reject  it  entirely  as  a  human  in- 
vention, and  place  it  in  a  category  with  exurcism,  chrismation 
or  anointing  with  oil  in  the  form  of  a  cross,  and  the  adminis- 
tration of  milk  and  honey  to  the  candidate  ;  all  which  they 
maintain,  were  human  additions  to  baptism,  introduced  about 
the  close  of  the  second  or  the  beginning  of  the  thiid  century. 

Not  wishing  to  give  this  article  a  controversial  character, 
we  shall  not  stop  to  investigate  the  process  of  reasoning  by 
which  these  conflicting  theeries  are  attempted  to  be  sustained ; 
but  shall  proceed  to  present  the  sentiments  generally  enter- 
tained in  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  church. 

The  Lutherans,  constituting  by  far  the  largest  Protestant 
denomination  in  the  world,  occupy  middle  ground  between  the 
Episcopal  and  the  Presbyterian  churches.     They  do  not  as  a 

'See  Christian  Spectator  of  December,  1831,  p.  652,  sqq.  m  a 
review  of  Harvey's  Inquiry ;  also  Prof.  Robinson's  remarks  on  con- 
firmation, Bii).  Repos.  of  .luly,  1831,  p.  423,  599  ;  an  extract  from 
which,  as  well  as  some  remarks  by  Prof.  Hodge  on  the  same  object, 
will  be  found  at  the  end  of  this  article. 


334  APPENDIX. 

body,  believe  that  confirmation  was  instituted  either  by  Christ 
or  the  apostles,  nor  do  they  generally  profess  to  find  conclusive 
evidence  in  the  word  of  God,  to  justify  the  belief  that  it  was 
even  practised  by  the  apostles.  The  portions  of  Scripture  re- 
corded Acts  viii.  14,  15,  and  Acts  xix.  1,  6,  which  are  usually 
quoted  as  apostolic  authority  for  the  observance  of  this  rite, 
are  understood  by  them  as  referring,  not  to  the  ordinary  solem- 
nity of  confirmation,  as  practised  in  the  church  at  the  present 
day,  but  to  the  miraculmts  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  conferred 
by  extraordinary  officers  for  an  extraordinary  purpose.  There 
have  indeed  been  some  very  respectable  divines  in  the  Luther- 
an church,  and  for  aught  we  know  there  may  be  yet,  who  have 
inferred  from  Heb.  vi.  1,2.  that  "the  imposition  of  hands" 
other  light  than  that  in  which  we  have  represented  it.  The 
may  possibly  have  been  continued  in  the  church  as  an  impress- 
ive mode  of  invoking  the  divine  blessing  on  those  who  were 
to  be  received  into  full  communion  with  the  church.  The 
passage  from  which  this  deduction  is  made,  reads  thus : — 
"  Therefore,  leaving  the  principles  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  let 
us  go  on  unto  perfection  ;  not  laying  again  the  foundation  of  re- 
pentance from  dead  works  and  faith  towards  God,  of  the  doc- 
trine of  baptism  and  the  laying  on  of  hands,  and  of  resurrection 
of  the  dead  and  eternal  judgment."  The  inspired  penman 
here  enumerates  the  laying  on  of  hands,  among  the  rudiments 
or  elementary  principles  of  Christianity,  and  it  is  supposed  by 
some,  that  although  the  laying  on  of  hands  was  first  designed 
to  accompany  the  communication  of  the  extraordinary  influ- 
ences of  the  Holy  Spirit,  it  was  nevertheless  retained  by  the 
early  Christians,  after  those  powers  had  ceased,  as  a  standing 
solemnity  to  mark  the  transition  from  infant-membership  in  the 
church  to  adult-membership.  It  will  be  perceived  that  this  is 
merely  a  supposition, — a  supposition  however,  which  receives 
some  strength  from  the  consideration,  that  no  other  rite  what- 
ever has  descended  from  the  apostolic  church,  to  which  the 
above  mentioned  imposition  of  hands  could  allude,  if  it  be  not 
confirmation.  But  even  granting  that  the  apostles  and  their 
immediate  successors  practised  confirmation,  which  the  pre- 
mises in  the  case  are  not  sufficiently  clear  to  warrant,  still  as 
that  presumed  primitive  practice  was  not  enforced  b^  a  "  thus 
saith  the  Lord,"  we  are  not  obligated  to  conform  to  it  any  fur- 
ther than  as  its  superior  adaptation  to  accomplish  good,  may 
commend  itself  to  us.  We  cannot  admit  that  the  example  of 
the  first  Christians,  including  that  of  the  apostles  unenforced 
by  a  command  is  binding  on  us,  especially  in  reference  to  a 
rite  merely  external.  Such  a  concession  would  involve  us  in 
inextricable  difficulties,  not  to  say  absurdities. 

Confirmation,  as  practised  among  Lutherans,  may  be  said  to 
present  two  aspects. 


APPENDIX.  335 

1.  It  is  a  personal  and  most  solemn  assumption  and  ratifica- 
tion of  the  covenant  of  grace,  whicli  was  recognized  and 
sealed  at  our  baptism.  The  members  of  the  church  are  bap- 
tized in  infancy,  and  though  they  are  then,  in  a  formal  man- 
ner, acknowledged  as  parties  to  the  covenant  and  consequently 
as  members  of  the  church,  yet  being  infants  and  incapable  of 
voluntary  action  in  a  moral  point  of  "view,  it  is  not  only  right, 
but  a  positive  duty  that  they  should  themselves,  when  tiiey 
arrive  at  a  proper  age,  come  forward  and  personally  renew  and 
confirm  the  vows  made  in  their  name,  by  their  sponsors  or 
representatives,  when  at  baptism  they  were  recognized  as  sub- 
jects of  God's  gracious  covenant.  God  requires  the  heart. 
His  deople  must  be  a  willing  people;  and  neither  our  services 
nor  our  persons  can  be  an  acceptable  oSfering  to  him,  if  not  ac- 
companied with  the  full  and  free  consent  of  the  will  and  the 
cheerful  flowing  forth  of  the  affections  of  the  soul.  Hence  it 
IS  eminently  proper  and  necessary,  that  there  should  be  some 
appropriate  rite,  in  which  adults  may  personally  take  upon 
themselves  and  ratify  the  solemn  promises  entered  into  in  their 
behalf  in  their  infancy.  To  afford  an  opportunity  for  the  dis- 
charge of  this  sacred  duty,  appears  to  be  one  of  the  principal 
designs  of  confirmation. 

Accordingly,  when  persons  present  themselves  as  candidates 
for  this  ordinance,  (they  should  always  present  themselves,  and 
not  come  merely  to  gratify  the  wishes  of  friends,  or  in  compli- 
ance with  the  usage  of  the  church,)  they  do  most  solemnly 
renew  the  vows  made  for  them  at  their  baptism.  They  en- 
gage, in  the  presence  of  men  and  angels,  to  renounce  the  devil 
and  all  his  works,  the  pomps  and  vanities  of  the  world ;  the 
lust  of  the  flesh,  the  lust  of  the  eye  and  the  pride  of  life;  to 
believe  in  Jesus,  and  to  serve  him  in  holiness  and  righteous- 
ness all  the  days  of  their  lives.  In  a  word  they  deliberately 
"join  themselves  to  the  Lord  in  a  perpetual  covenant,  never  to 
be  forgotten." 

2.  The  second  aspect  in  which  this  rite  may  be  viewed,  ex- 
hibits it  to  us  as  a  solemn  mode  of  admitting  individuals  to 
adult  church-membership,  or  to  full  communion  in  the  church. 
The  enjoyment  of  the  privileges  of  membership  in  Christ's 
church  IS  progressive.  It  commences  with  baptism  and  the 
special  prayers  of  God's  people  ;  next,  as  the  infant  member 
grows  older  and  the  powers  of  the  mind  are  developed,  it  in- 
cludes religious  instruction  from  the  preaching  of  God's  word, 
and  the  private  labors  of  the  pastor  and  members ;  to  this  is' 
gradually  added  the  society  of  the  faithful  followers  of  Christ, 
whose  example  and  exhortations  will  afford  the  young  member 
important  aid  in  his  journey  toward  the  land  of  blTss ;  then 
ensue  the  advantages  resulting  from  chureh-discipline,  which 


336  APPENDIX. 

consist  in  the  watchfulness  exercised  by  the  church  over  the 
purity  of  individual  members,  in  exhorting-,  admonishing,  re- 
proving, censuring,  &c.,  the  member  who  wanders  from  the 
footsteps  of  the  Saviour.  And  although  the  latter  stages  of 
this  discipline  may  be  painful,  the  erring  youth  will  be  greatly 
benefited  by  it,  and  feel  thankful  to  the  church  that  even  this 
severe  remedy  is  employed  to  lead  him  to  the  Saviour  of  his 
soul.  Finally,  having  reached  mature  age  and  been  properly 
instructed,  the  last  and  crowning  act,  is  admission  to  full  and 
complete  membership  in  the  church  of  Christ,  whereby  he 
publicly  devotes  himself  to  the  service  of  his  Saviour,  volun- 
tarily presenting  his  soul  and  body  as  a  living  sacrifice  upon 
the  Christian  altar.  He  thus,  in  a  public  and  solemn  manner 
comes  out  from  the  world  and  declares  himself  to  be  a  member 
of  God's  kingdom,  a  subject  of  his  covenant,  and  a  disciple 
of  his  Son.  This  is  equivalent  to  what  is  termed  in  some 
churches,  a  public  profession  of  religion.  In  the  Lutheran 
church,  this  profession  is  made  at  confirmation. 

Every  church  has  some  mode  of  receiving  members  into  full 
communion,  and  as  Christ  did  not  prescribe  any  particular 
form,  that  which  is  the  most  appropriate  and  impressive,  and 
has  the  least  tendency  to  nourish  superstition,  may  be  regarded 
as  the  best.  We  have  no  objection  to  the  Presbyterian,  or 
Methodist  mode  ;  nay,  we  are  willing  to  admit  that  their  modea 
may  be  more  appropriate  than  ours  for  their  respective  churches ; 
but  at  the  same  time  we  maintain  that  ours  is  decidedly  the 
best  for  us.  Of  this,  extensive  experience  has  long  since  con- 
vinced us.  Confirmation,  with  its  antecedent  and  attendant 
religious  exercises,  is  in  itself  adapted  to  make  deep  and  salu- 
tary impressions,  as  well  upon  the  assembled  congregation 
who  witness  the  solemn  scenes,  as  upon  those  who  are  the 
personal  participants  of  them.  Moreover,  the  Master  has  again 
and  again  sanctioned  this  rite  with  his  smiles,  and  blessed  it 
on  countless  occasions,  as  the  means  of  awakening  sinners  and 
reviving  and  strengthening  believers.  So  long  therefore,  as 
any  degree  of  fidelity  and  spirituality  mark  the  character  of 
our  ministers  and  people,  the  rite  of  confirmation  with  the  pre- 
vious religious  instruction  connected  with  it,  will  be  held  in 
very  high  esteem  and  be  practised  in  the  Evangelical  Luther- 
an churches  with  great  confidence  in  the  promised  blessing 
of  God. 

Having  admitted  that  the  evidence  in  support  of  apostolic 
example  for  this  rite,  is  not  conclusive,  and  that  if  it  even 
were,  not  being  enforced  by  an  injunction,  it  would  form  no 
obligatory  rule  for  us,  the  question  may  be  proposed :  "  why, 
under  such  circumstances,  do  you  still  adhere  to  it?" — Because 
the  Great  Head  of  the  church,  having  in  this  case,  as  well  as 
many  other  similar  ones,  given  no  specific  directions,  but  left 


APPENDIX.  337 

US  to  adopt  such  form  as  in  consistence  with  the  general  prin- 
ciples of  the  gospel,  might  most  strongly  commend  itself,  we 
are  of  opinion  that  this  rite  is  peculiarly  adapted  to  the  very 
purpose  for  which  it  is  employed.  It  is  therefore  on  grounds 
of  Christian  expedience  or  utility,  that  we  hold  to  confirmation  ; 
we  prefer  it  decidedly  to  every  other  outward  mode  of  renew- 
ing the  covenant  of  baptism  and  making  a  public  profession  of 
religion.  We  know  assuredly,  that  it  is  acceptable  to  that 
God  who  has  so  frequently  sanctioned  and  blessed  it. 

To  this  consideration  may  be  added  the  fact,  that  confirma- 
tion lays  claim  to  great  antiquity.  The  laying  on  of  hands 
was  a  common  usage  under  the  Old  Testament  dispensation. 
Thus  when  Moses  constituted  Joshua  his  successor,  God  ap- 
pointed him  to  lay  his  hands  upon  him.'  Jacob  laid  his  hands 
upon  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  when  he  gave  them  his  last 
blessing.2  The  high-priest  stretched  out  his  hands  to  the 
people  as  often  as  he  pronounced  the  divine  blessing  upon 
them.^  This  practice  was  also  frequent  in  sacrifices  ;  the  per- 
son bringing  the  victim,  laid  his  hands  on  the  head,  ^c* 

All  this  was  indeed  not  confirmation,  but  still  it  marks  the 
practice  of  the  imposition  of  hands  as  ancient  and  solemn,  and 
always  connected  with  religious  or  devotional  exercises. 

In  the  New  Testament  we  find,  besides  that  already  referred 
to,  (Heb.  vi.  1 — 2,)  at  least  four  kinds  or  occasions  of  the  im- 
position of  hands  recounted.  The  first  by  Christ  himself,  to 
express  an  authoritative  benediction  ;^  the  second,  in  the  heal- 
ing of  diseases  f  the  third,  in  conferring  the  extraordinary  gifts 
of  the  Spirit,^  and  the  fourth  in  setting  apart  persons  to  sacred 
office.* 

Though  none  of  these  instances  affords  a  clear  example  of 
confirmation,  nor  even  alludes  to  one  unless  it  be  that  recorded 
in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  yet,  if  the  apostles  received  into 
full  communion  members  who  had  been  baptized  in  their  in- 
fancy, it  appears  to  us  to  be  not  improbable  that  they  did  so  by 
the  imposition  of  hands  and  prayer,  in  ether  words,  by  confir- 
mation, because  this  mode  of  doing  it  would  have  fallen  in 
most  harmoniously  with  the  well  known  and  long  established 
usages  of  the  Jews,  and  have  precisely  coincided  with  the 
spirit  and  custom  of  the  apostolic  age.  This  probability  is 
heightened  by  the  historical  fact,  that  the  Jews  were  in  the 
habit  of  presenting  their  children  at  the  age  of  thirteen  years, 
to  the  congregation,  that  they  might  be  publicly  examined,  re- 
new the  covenant  which  had  been  made  for  them  in  their  in- 
fancy, and  take  upon  themselves  their  obligations  of  obedience 

'Numb,  xxvii.  18.      *Gen.  xlviii.  14.      ^Levit.  ix.  22.     ^Ibid  i.  4. 
^Matt.  xix.  and  Mark  x.  16.  "^Mark  xvi.  18,  Acts  xxviii.  8. 

'Acts  viii.  n,  and  .xix.  6.  ^Acts  vi.  6,  xiii.  3,  1  Tim.  iv.  14. 

29* 


338  APPENDIX. 

to  the  divine  law.'  On  these  occasions  the  elders  of  the  Syn- 
agogue laid  their  hands  upon  them  and  pronounced  them  the 
sons  of  the  congregation  of  Israel,  The  objection  that  the  laying 
on  of  hands  by  the  apostles  (Acts  viii.  17,  and  xix.  6,)  was 
accompanied  hy  the  extraordinary  influences  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
does  not  appear  to  be  a  solid  one,  because  the  ceremony  was 
attended  by  the  same  miraculous  effects  in  cases  of  ordination 
to  the  gospel  ministry,  (1  Tim.  iv.  14,  and  2  Tim.  i.  6,)  and  yet 
the  practice  of  ordaining  in  the  same  mode  is  still  retained  in 
churches  that  reject  confirmation,  though  they  make  no  pre- 
tensions to  confer  the  Holy  Ghost  on  such  occasions.  To  con- 
demn confirmation  then,  simply  because  we  cannot  thereby 
impart  those  supernatural  gifts,  would  be  no  less  fatal  to  min- 
isterial ordination. 

As  our  Lord,  when  he  instituted  the  new  seal  of  his  cove- 
nant, did  not  introduce  a  novel  rite,  but  selected  baptism  which 
had  long  been  used  among  the  Jews  in  the  reception  of  prose- 
lytes, and  appointed  it  to  a  new  purpose,  is  it  not  very  reason- 
able to  suppose  that  the  imposition  of  hands  accompanied  by 
prayer, — a  practice  so  well  understood  among  the  Jews,  should 
be  adopted  as  the  mode  of  admitting  members  to  full  commu- 
nion in  his  church  ]  But  whether  or  not,  it  is  certain  that 
confirmation  can  be  traced  to  a  very  early  period  in  the  church. 
Dr.  CampbelP  thinks  it  arose  in  the  second  century  from  the 
right  which  the  bishop  claimed  to  confirm  the  baptisms  that 
were  administered  by  the  presbyters  and  deacons  of  his  church. 
Towards  the  close  of  the  second  century,  it  was  undoubtedly 
in  vogue,  for  TertuUian  mentions  a  number  of  superstitious 
practices  that  were  associated  with  it  about  that  period.  The 
ceremony  was  performed  immediately  after  baptism,-  provided 
the  bishop  was  present,  and  in  his  absence,  was  deferred  until 
the  candidates  could  present  themselves,  or  if  children,  until 
they  could  be  presented  by  others  to  him.  In  that  age  the 
imposition  of  hands  was  regarded  as  essential  to  the  comple- 
tion of  baptism,  and  was  usually  performed  by  the  bishops, 
who  professed  to  be  the  successors  of  the  apostles,  and  as 
such,  empowered  to  communicate  the  Holy  Ghost  through  the 
act  of  confirmation.  "  For  their  convenience  the  two  festivals 
of  Easter  and  Whitsuntide  were  chosen  as  the  proper  seasons 
for  adults  and  children,  when  the  candidates  were  required  to 
assemble  from  all  places  in  the  bishop's  church,  and  the  part 
which  the  bishops  then  performed  was  that  of  the  imposition 
of  hands,  while  the  act  of  baptism,  might  be  done  by  presby- 
ters and  deacons.  Such  as  had  been  baptized  in  the  interval, 
and  converts  from  heresy  who  had  received  baptism  in  their 

'SeeBuxtorf  Syn.    Jud.  cap.  3. 

^See  Lectures  on  Ecclesiastical  History. 


APPENDIX.  339 

own  sects,  now  received  only  the  imposition  of  hands  with  its 

accompanying  ceremonies." 

But  whatever  superstitious  frippery  may  have  disfigured 
the  rite  in  question  in  the  second  and  third  centuries,  and  in 
later  ages  among  the  Roman  Catholics ;  in  the  Lutheran 
Church  it  is  regarded,  so  far  as  our  knowledge  extends,  in  no 
other  light  than  that  in  which  we  have  represented  it.  The 
apology  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  contains  the  following 
declaration  on  this  subject :  Oonfirmation  is  a  rite  which  xoas 
transmitted  to  us  from  the  fathers,  but  which  the  church  never 
regarded  as  essential  to  salvation  ,-  for  it  is  not  supported  by  a  di- 
vine command.^  We  make  no  pretension  to  impart  the  Holy 
Ghost  by  confirmation,  we  ascribe  no  magic  virtue  to  the 
laying  on  of  hands,  nor  to  the  form  of  words  accompanying 
that  act ;  we  claim  for  them  no  other  than  their  appropriate 
moral  influence,  and  are  convinced  that  they  had  not  anciently, 
and  have  not  at  present,  any  other  in  the  hands  of  bishops. 
The  testimony  of  the  illustrious  Calvin  on  this  subject,  well 
deserves  a  place  in  this  article.  He  speaks  of  it  in  the  highest 
terms,  (Institutes,  book  iv.  chap.  19,  §.  4.)  It  deserves,  he 
thinks,  "  to  be  regarded  as  sacred  and  solemn."  He  adds, 
that  he  "  highly  approves  of  it,  and  wishes  it  were  restored  to 
its  primitive  use,  uncorrupted  by  superstition."  In  Book  iv. 
chap.  19,  §.  13,  he  again  says  :  "  I  sincerely  wish  that  we 
retained  the  custom  (of  confirming)  which  I  have  stated  was 
practised  among  the  ancients" — and  his  principal  argument  in 
his  subsequent  remarks  is  founded  on  the  catechetical  instruc- 
tion which  was  connected  with  it,  and  by  which  such  salutary 
effects  are  produced,  as  we  have  already  had  occasion  to  re- 
mark. 


No.  m. 
CONFIRMATION. 

CONTINUED. 

THE  BENEFITS  OF  CONFIRMATION,  AND  THE  QUALIFICATIONS  NEC- 
ESSARY TO  A  PROFITABLE  RECEPTION  OF  IT. 

Having  examined  the  nature  and  design  of  confirmation,  we 
shall  proceed  to  set  forth  its  benefits,  and  the  qualifications 
necessary  to  a  profitable  reception  of  it. 

The  great  value  of  this  rite  consists,  not  in  the  simple  act 
of  laying  en  of  hands,  nor  even  in  the  form  of  words  uttered 

'Formula  Concordise,  p.  201. 


340  APPENDIX. 

by  the  minister;  for,  apart  from  the  knowledge  of  divine  truth, 
and  the  impression  which  it  is  designed  to  make  upon  the 
heart,  the  whole  ceremony,  so  far  as  the  recipient  of  it  is  con- 
cerned, is  little  else  than  a  solemn  mockery.  Confirmation 
then,  must  be  considered  in  connection  with  the  course  of  in- 
struction which  precedes  it,  and  as  the  closing  act  of  a  series 
of  religious  efforts  intended,  and  with  the  divine  blessing 
adapted  to  prepare  the  candidates  for  "the  communion  of 
saints ;"  that  is,  for  their  communion  with  Christ  as  their  Head, 
and  with  God's  people  as  members,  of  which  communion  the 
Lord's  supper  is  the  visible  sign. 

Some  time  before  a  Lutheran  minister  intends  to  administer 
confirmation,  he  invites  all  who  desire  to  take  up  the  cross 
and  follow  the  Redeemer,  to  meet  him  in  the  church  or  lec- 
ture-room. Among  those  invited,  are  particularly  such  as  are 
religiously  disposed,  or  awakened  to  a  sense  of  their  sins,  and 
others,  whether  baptized  or  not,  who  are  old  enough  to  make  a 
personal  profession  of  religion.  In  order  to  enforce  his  invita- 
tion, he  seeks  a  private  interview  with  all  whose  duty  it  is  to 
attend  his  public  ministrations,  but  have  not  yet  been  admitted 
to  full  membership,  and  urges  upon  them  the  necessity  of  this 
duty.  All  are  exhorted  to  attend  the  contemplated  course  of  reli- 
gious instruction,  with  the  understanding  however  that  no  one 
will  be  required  or  even  permitted  by  the  discipline  of  the  church, 
to  be  confirmed,  unless  the  religious  instruction  is  blessed  as 
the  means  of  awakening  his  heart  and  producing  a  sincere  de- 
sire to  consecrate  himself  to  God. 

The  "catechetical  lectures"  now  commence;  each  catechu- 
men is  provided  with  Luther's  Smaller  Catechism,  which,  so 
far  as  may  be  deemed  advisable,  is  committed  to  memory  to- 
gether with  accompanying  proof-texts.  The  minister  explains 
the  object  of  the  instruction,  the  nature  and  design  of  baptism, 
of  confirmation  and  the  Lord's  supper ;  he  aims  at  making 
them  acquainted  with  themselves  and  with  God,  with  their 
own  character  as  fallen  and  hell-deserving  creatures,  and  the 
character  of  Christ  as  the  only  Saviour  of  a  perishing  world; 
the  Holy  Spirit  is  represented  as  the  only  efficient  agent,  and 
the  inspired  word  of  God  as  the  instrumental  means  of  renew- 
ing and  sanctifying  their  nature.  The  whole  plan  of  salva- 
tion, every  important  doctrine  and  precept  of  the  gospel,  espe- 
cially the  nature  and  indispensable  necessity  of  repentance 
and  faith,  of  thorough  conversion  to  God  and  of  newness  and 
holiness  of  life,  are  elucidated  and  inculcated  in  as  simple  and 
earnest  a  manner  as  possible,  so  that  the  youngest  and  weak- 
est may  fully  understand.  No  scriptural  efforts  are  unem- 
ployed, to  prevail  on  them  to  turn  to  the  Lord  with  their  whole 
heart ;  to  yield  without  delay  to  the  claims  of  God  and  to  be- 


APPENDIX.  341 

come  and  forever  remain  his  humble  and  obedient  children. 
1  he  meetings  are  opened  with  singing  and  prayer,  and  closed 
in  the  same  manner;  the  catechumens  themselves,  amply  in- 
structed on  the  subject  of  prayer,  if  qualified  publicly  to  lead 
in  this  duty,  are  sometimes  called  on  to  offer  up  the  closincr 
prayer,  1  he  Sacred  Scriptures  are  made  the  only  basis  of  all 
these  lectures;  they  are  the  polar-star  of  the  Lutheran  minis- 
ter in  imparting  religious  instruction;  with  them  he  lays  the 
toundation,  rears  the  superstructure  and  adds  the  cap-stone ; 
the  catechism  he  also  uses  faithfully,  not  however  to  determine 
me  sense  of  God  s  word,  but  as  a  summary  of  it,  to  direct  him 
in  his  general  course  and  facilitate  and  simplify  his  lectures. 
For  every  meeting  with  his  beloved  pupils,  he  is  careful  to 
prepare  himse  f  previously  in  his  closet,  and  by  prayerfully 
reading  the  Bible  and  other  devotional  works  calculated  to  in- 
terest aiKl  instruct  his  own  heart  and  solemnize  his  own  feel- 

S  i^^ff"  ""  ^"'■'^''^  '"'  ^'^^P^y  interesting  and  important 
work,  he  takes  occasion  to  converse  with  every  catechumen  on 
the  great  subject  of  his  personal  salvation.  At  these  inter- 
views he  ascertains  from  each,  the  state  of  his  heart,  the  meas- 
ure of  his  doctrinal  knowledge,  his  religious  experience  his 
peculiar  trials  and  difficultiel',  &c.,  and^s  enabled  to  ?o  ma 
tolerable  estimate  of  the  qualifications  of  every  one  for  the  ap- 
proaching  solemnities  This  course  of  instruction  is  continued 
at  hrst  once,  and  subsequently,  twice  or  thrice  a  week,  for 
two  or  three  months,  and  often  longer. 

"Such  is  the  course  of  instruction  substantially  pursued  bv 
the  great  mass  of  our  divines,  with  the  variations  which  the 

lf^tich\r'—r  i^r^^  "^^^  ^^^^^^^«'  ^"^  ^he  exercise 
ot  which  the  principles  of  Christian  liberty,  so  hio-hly  prized 
and  so  fully  enjoyed  in  the  Lutheran  church  secure  to^U ;  ye^ 
has  1   not  unfrequently  been  the  theme  of  invidious  clamor  to 

e'  Informed  "  B^^'^'  T'  ^'  -"-dversion  from  others  beN 
ter  informed.     But  we  have  never  heard,  nor  do  we  expect 

"fZ  ?  ^^y'.°^^  «i»?l«  t-^^ly  pious  pastor,  who  1^%  at- 
tended to  this  instruction,  and  did  not  regard  it  as  a  hi^ht 
blessed  means  of  bringing  souls  to  Christ.  By  unconverted 
ministers,  this  duty,  like  all  others,  will  be  perfonned  as  a 
Zt  SuS."Y'  T'%  '!"'''  ^^-^^-  tho'seX  attend 
nothincr  ekp  ?h.  '"^-^  '^l^'  -'"'?"'  ™^^^  '^  °"^  P^^'ors,  it  is 
nothing  else  than  a  series  of  meetings  for  prayer,  sino-in^  ex- 
hor  ation  and  individual  personal  interview,  betw;en  them  and 

adonri^^tl^  ''','  '°"'"^?  ^^^  ^^'^^^^«"'  ^^  ^^^^^h,  wWiout 
adopting  the  novel  nomenclature  of  the  day,  they  can  eniov 
al  the  facilities  and  afford  to  their  heare/s  al/the  benefiti 
aimed  at,  and  doubtless  often  attained  by  others,  in  what  are 
termed  anxious  meetings,  inquiry  meetings,  clas  meeting 
private  conferences,  &c.  &c.   ^Indeed,  the  friends  of  This  go?d 


342  APPENDIX. 

old  custom  are  delighted  to  see  the  several  denominations,  un- 
der different  appellations,  adopting  the  substance  of  the  same 
thing;  nor  do  we  care  by  what  name  the  thing  is  known,  so 
that  God  is  glorified,  and  sinners  are  saved.'" 

The  instruction  ended,  an  examination  of  the  catechumens 
takes  place,  at  which  the  pastor  presides  and  the  church-offi- 
cers are  witnesses.^  After  the  examination,  the  minister  re- 
commends to  the  officers,  as  many  of  the  applicants  for  full 
communion  in  the  church,  as  he  thinks  are  qualified;  and  their 
cases  decided,  all  who  have  been  deemed  worthy,  are  con- 
firmed, that  is,  they  are  permitted  publicly  to  renew  and  ratify 
their  baptismal  promises  and  by  a  public  profession,  to  dedi- 
cate themselves  to  the  service  of  Him  who  loved  them  and 
gave  himself  for  them.  Those  of  the  candidates  who  had  not 
been  baptized,  enter  into  the  same  engagements  preparatory  to 
their  baptism,  which  are  made  by  such  as  are  confirmed  In 
these  cases,  some  of  our  ministers  do  not  deem  confirmation 
necessary  while  others  do.  As  the  Christian  cannot  renew 
his  vows  to  God  too  often,  even  though  it  should  be  every  day, 
there  is  certainly  no  impropriety  in  administering  confirmation 
to  those  adults  who  have  just  heen  babtized,  and  it  may  have 
a  beneficial  effect. 

The  ceremony  of  confirmation  is  thus  performed. — First, 
several  appropriate  questions  are  proposed ;  these  being  an- 
swered in  the  affirmative,  (which  with  the  prayer  of  the  offici- 
ating minister,  is  considered  the  essential  part  of  the  act  itself,) 
the  catechumens  kneel  at  the  altar,  and  the  pastor  laying  his 
hands  on  each  one  as  he  passes  around,  solemnly  invokes  the 
blessing  of  God  upon  him  in  a  short  prayer.  He  then  extends 
to  each  the  hand  of  brotherly  fellowship,  and  in  the  name  of 
the  whole  congregation,  acknowledges  him  as  a  member  of 
the  church  and  entitled  to  all  its  privileges,  so  long  as  his  de- 
portment shall  correspond  with  the  solemn  promises  which  he 
has  just  made. 

It  is  accordingly  the  public  and  solemn  renewal  of  the  bap- 
tismal covenant,  as  the  concluding  act  of  a  previous  and  full 
course  of  religious  instruction,  which  is  regarded  as  confirma- 
tion, and  not  the  imposition  of  hands ;  indeed  the  latter,  though 
an  appropriate  religious  practice,  always  connected  with  it,  is 
not  even  considered  essential. 

'Pop.  Theol. 

-In  some  neighborhoods  this  examination  is  held  in  the  church  in 
the  presence  of  tlie  whole  congregation,  but  experience  as  well  as  the 
nature  of  the  exercise  has  shown,  that  the  object  can  be  much  better 
accomplished,  if  conducted  more  privately  and  by  a  personal  inquh'y 
ivith  each  indii-idual  respedivg  the  evidence  of  his  ov:n  personal  piety, 
instead  of  a  general  examination  on  the  doctrines  and  duties  of 
Christianity. 


APPENDIX.  343 

■  The  foregoing  view  of  confirmation,  including  the  prepara- 
tory course  of  instruction  and  the  attending  circumstances, 
will  enable  the  intelligent  and  unbiased  mind  to  form  some 
idea  of  its  advantages.  We  will  only  yet  remark,  that  in  ad- 
dition to  the  special  prayer  of  the  officiating  pastor  for  the 
subject  of  this  rite,  the  fervent  supplications  of  the  assembled 
congregation  of  God's  people,  are  also  enlisted  in  his  behalf. 
His  religious  obligations,  though  not  increased,  are  more 
deeply  impressed  upon  his  mind,  and  this  will  have  a  tendency 
to  keep  him  faithful  and  diligent  in  the  duties  ot  Christian  life, 
to  make  him  watchful  and  prayerful,  and  we  may  justly  hope, 
to  prepare  him  the  better  for  the  reception  of  those  influences 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  are  necessary  to  aid  and  guide  him 
in  all  the  ordinances  and  commandments  of  the  Lord,  blame- 
less. As  he  confirms  the  obligations  arising  from  his  covenant- 
relation  to  Jehovah,  and  willingly  renews  his  vows  of  self- 
consecration  to  him;  so  God,  by  his  ministering  servant,  con- 
firms all  his  promises  of  grace  and  mercy,  so  that  when  this 
rite  is  duly  administered,  and  duly  received,  it  can  hardly  fail 
to  prove  the  occasion  of  the  richest  blessings.  It  would  be  a 
most  dishonoring  reflection  on  the  divine  faithfulness  and 
goodness,  to  suppose  that  a  surrender  of  all  we  are  and  have, 
to  the  great  Head  of  the  church,  in  a  manner  so  solemn  and 
serious,  and  withal,  so  intelligent  and  voluntary,  should  not  be 
highly  acceptable  to  him.  He  has  declared  that  he  will  honor 
those  who  honor  him ;  that  he  will  confess  before  his  Father 
and  his  holy  angels,  all  who  sincerely  confess  him  before  men, 
and  though  heaven  and  earth  should  pass  away,  not  one  jot  or 
tittle  of  his  promises  shall  fail.  Often  has  his  sanctifying 
and  comforting  grace  descended  like  the  dew  of  heaven,  on 
occasions  of  confirmation ;  and  thanks  to  his  unmerited  grace, 
many  humble  believers  can  testify,  from  happy  experience, 
that  when  they  sealed  their  covenant  with  God,  by  renewed 
vows  of  fidelity,  they  found  themselves  "sealed  with  the 
Holy  Spirit"  unto  the  day  of  eternal  redemption. 

"The  orthodox  and  pious  Knapp  speaks  advisedly,  when 
be  remarks  that  confirmation,  in  the  cases  of  many,  is  fol- 
lowed, as  experience  teaches,  by  the  most  blessed  eflfects, 
through  their  whole  life.  '  And  if,'  he  continues,  '  its  advan- 
tages do  not  always  immediately  appear,  they  often  manifest 
themselves  in  after  years ;  for  the  seed  which  was  sown  in 
the  heart  frequently  lies  concealed  a  long  time  ere  it  comes 
up.'  Both  he,  and  Morus,  (in  the  Epitome,  &c.  p.  238  of 
Schneider's  German  translation,)  exhort  the  pastor  to  be  care- 
ful and  conscientious  in  the  performance  of  the  duties  which 
arc  connected  with  this  '  laudable  custom.'  Many,  says  Dr. 
Lochman,  in  his  History,  &c.  of  the  Evan.  Luth.  church,  p. 


344  APPENDIX. 

158,  date  the  beginning  of  their  real  conversion  to  God  from 
their  confirmation."' 

The  qualifications  requisite  to  a  profitable  reception  of  this 
rite,  remain  to  be  stated.  Believing  that  our  excellent  For- 
mula of  Discipline,  corresponds  on  this  point  with  the  princi- 
ples of  the  gospel,  we  shall  be  guided  by  that  in  our  remarlis. 

"It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Council  to  admit  to  member- 
ship adults,  who  make  application,  and  whom  on  mature  exam- 
ination, they  shall  judge  to  be  possessed  of  the  qualifications 
hereafter  specified.  They  shall  be  obedient  subjects  of  divine 
grace,  that  is,  they  must  either  be  genuine  Christians,  or  sat- 
isfy the  Church  Council  that  they  are  sincerely  endeavoring  to 
become  such.  Also  to  admit  to  communion  of  the  church,  all 
those  who  are  admitted  to  church-membership  in  their  infancy, 
and  whom  on  like  examination,  they  shall  judge  possessed  of 
the  above  mentioned  qualification.  No  one  shall  be  consid- 
ered a  fit  subject  for  confirmation,  who  has  not  previously  at- 
tended a  course  of  religious  lectures,  delivered  by  the  pastor 
on  the  most  important  doctrines  and  principles  of  religion; 
unless  the  pastor  should  be  satisfied  that  the  applicant's  at- 
tainments are  adequate  without  this  attendance."* 

It  accordingly  appears,  that  the  candidates  for  confirmation, 
must  be  "obedient  subjects  of  divine  grace,  that  is,  they  must 
either  be  genuine  Christians,  or  satisfy  the  Church  Council 
tliat  they  are  sincerely  endeavoring  to  become  such." 

All  mankind  are  the  subjects  of  divine  grace,  for  all  are 
more  or  less  the  recipients  of  his  unmerited  favor.  Those 
who  have  been  born  in  a  Christian  land  and  have  an  opportunity 
to  enjoy  Christian  privileges,  are  the  special  subjects  of  God's 
grace,  being  favored  with  the  special  grace  of  his  gospel. 
But  candidates  for  confirmation  must  be  "  obedient  subjects  of 
divine  grace,  that  is.  they  must  either  be  genuine  Christians, 
or  satisfy  the  Church  Council  that  they  are  sincerely  endea- 
voring to  become  such."  Now,  individuals  who  are  awakened 
to  a  sense  of  their  religious  duties  and  anxious  to  be  reconciled 
to  God,  have,  to  a  certain  extent,  been  obedient  to  divine  grace, 
or  they  would  not  be  in  this  awakened  and  anxious  condition. 
It  will  not  be  maintained  that  persons  of  this  description  are 
converted,  that  they  have  "saving  faith,"  or  are  genuine 
Christians.  The  most  that  can  be  said  of  them  is,  that  they 
are  penitent,  inquiring,  seeking  sinners ;  they  are,  as  it  were, 
in  a  state  of  transition  from  darkness  to  light,  and  from  the 
kingdom  of  Satan  to  the  glorious  liberty  of  the  children  of 
God.  Such  persons  then,  though  not  radically  converted,  are 
nevertheless,  according  to  our  Discipline,  suitable  candidates 

'Essays  on  Confirmation  in  Lutheran  Observer,  June  15th,  1832. 
'Formula  of  Discip.  chap.  iv.  §  5. 


APPENDIX.  345 

for  confirmation,  and  therefore  bound  to  present  themselves  for 
admission  to  adult-membership  in  Christ's  church,  and  his  min- 
isters have  no  right  to  repel  them.  If  the  Lord  himself  were  per- 
sonally on  earth,  and  they  should  humbly  approach  him  con- 
fessing and  mourning  over  their  guilt,  and  promising  a  faithful 
use  of  the  measure  of  grace,  however  small,  already  bestowed 
upon  them,' the  general  benevolence  of  his  character  and  the 
superabounding  riches  of  his  mercy,  are  a  pledge  that  He  would 
not  reject  them.  No  verily.  He  who  in  the  days  of  his  flesh 
so  often  fulfilled  the  prediction :  "  A  bruised  reed  shall  he  not 
break,  and  the  smoking  flax  shall  he  not  quench,"'  and  who, 
in  the  plentitude  of  his  unsearchable  grace  deigned  to  eat 
with  publicans  and  sinners  in  the  hope  of  recovering  them 
from  the  error  of  their  ways;  would  welcome  them  to  his  com- 
munion, and  diligently  employ  the  occasion  to  strengthen  their 
good  desires  and  establish  them  in  their  upright  ellbrts  to  be- 
come his  obedient  followers. 

This  view  of  the  question  before  us,  so  obviously  in  accord- 
ance with  the  practice  and  theory  of  the  Lutheran  church,  falls 
in  no  less  with  the  system  of  our  Methodist  brethren,  which 
prescribes  an  anxious  "desire  to  flee  from  the  wrath  to  come" 
as  the  pre-requisite  for  admission  to  the  table  of  the  Lord. 
But  what  is  best  of  all,  it  harmonizes  with  the  spirit  of  the 
gospel  and  with  examples  of  admission  to  church-member- 
ship recorded  on  its  inspired  pages.  To  refer  to  and  examine 
those  examples,  would  extend  this  article,  already  too  long,  be- 
yond our  prescribed  limits. 

However  desirable  it  therefore  is,  that  all  who  are  received 
into  full  communion  in  the  church,  should  have  bright  evi- 
dences of  their  conversion,  and  undoubted  assurance  of  faith 
and  of  their  acceptance  with  God,  yet  we  think  these  high  at- 
tainments are  not  essential  to  a  profitable  reception  of  confirm- 
ation, or  of  any  religious  ordinance.  Christ  invited  all  who 
'labor  and  are  heavy  laden  to  come  unto  him,"  and  never  re- 
jected the  trembling  penitent,  though  that  penitent  was  merely 
"  framing  his  doings  to  turn  unto  the  Lord,"  and  had  advanced 
no  further  than  to  place  his  foot,  as  it  were,  upon  the  thresh- 
hold  of  the  sanctuary.  Moreover,  the  gospel  of  Christ  with 
all  its  promises,  his  church  with  all  her  institutions,  are  de- 
signed for  the  encouragement  and  salvation  of  the  humble  and 
contrite.  "The  sacrifices  of  God  are  a  broken  spirit;  a  broken 
and  a  contrite  heart,  0  God,  thou  will  not  dispise."^  "  But 
to  this  man  will  I  look,  even  to  him  that  is  poor  and  of  a  con- 
-trite  spirit  and  trembleth  at  my  word."^  Do  you  therefore 
mourn  in  bitterness  of  soul  for  your  sins,  and  feel  that  God 
would  be  just,  if  he  were  to  punish  you  with  everlasling  de- 
struction from  his  presence  and  the  glory  of  his  power? 

'Isa.  xlii.  3.  ^pg.  jj^  j^,  sjsa.  ixvi.  2. 


346  APPENDIX. 

Christ  bids  you  come  to  him  just  as  you  are, — with  all  your 
misery  and  all  your  guilt, — to  take  his  yoke  upon  you, — to 
profess  him  before  men,  and  to  follow  him  in  the  way  of  his  ap- 
pointment. He  urges  you  to  come  to  his  ordinances,  and  with 
joy  to  draw  water  from  these  wells  of  salvation.  And  all  his 
invitations  are  accompanied  with  the  gracious  promise,  that 
"  him  that  cometh,  he  will  in  no  wise  cast  out."*  Fear  not, 
trembling  sinner,  to  approach  the  altar,  and  renew  your  bap- 
tismal vows  in  the  rite  of  confirmation ;  you  may  there  find 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  whose  good  pleasure  it  is  to  administer 
unto  those  who  mourn  in  Zion,  and  to  appoint  unto  them 
"  beauty  for  ashes,  the  oil  of  joy  for  mourning,  and  the  gar- 
ments of  praise  for  the  spirit  of  heaviness." 

But  we  must  return  to  the  point  from  which  we  have  some- 
what wandered ;  and  here  a  very  important  question  presents 
itself  for  consideration,  viz.  How  are  we  to  know  whether  a 
man  is  a  genuine  christian,  or  whether  he  is  sincerely  and  actu- 
ally endeavoring  to  become  one  1  Can  we  short-sighted 
mortals  read  the  hidden  thoughts  or  explore  the  secret  motives 
of  our  neighbor  1  If  any  minister  or  set  of  church-officers  lay 
claim  to  such  profound  wisdom,  let  them  produce  their  cre- 
dentials from  the  Most  High,  under  his  broad  seal  of  miracles ; 
but  if  they  cannot  do  this,  their  pretensions  are  entitled  to  no 
more  credit  than  those  of  the  astrologer  who  casts  nativities 
from  the  aspect  of  the  planets.  God  has  wisely  reserved  to 
himself  the  prerogative  of  discerning  spirits.  "I,  Jehovah, 
search  the  heart.  I  try  the  reins. "•  It  appears  then,  that  the 
REALITY  of  conversion,  or  even  of  sincere  anxiety  to  be  con- 
verted, cannot  be  laid  down  as  the  ground  of  admission  to 
adult-membership,  because  we  have  not  the  means  of  positively 
ascertaining  the  existence  of  that  reality.  We  often  cannot 
detect  a  perjury  in  the  custom-house,  or  dishonesty  in  the 
common  affairs  of  life ;  how  then  can  we  decide  whether  he 
who  recounts  his  religious  experience,  or  asserts  his  anxiety 
to  become  a  christian,  is  not  a  hypocrite  1  If  it  be  answered  : 
"  By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them  ,-"  we  reply, — even  so,  by 
THEIR  FRUITS,  that  is,  by  their  external  life, — their  walk  '  and 
conversation,' — but  not  by  their  inward  experience,  their  secret 
exercises,  or  that  which  passes  in  their  own  breasts  and  is 
known  only  to  God  and  themselves.  The  ehurch  of  God,  so 
far  as  its  outward  ordinances  are  concerned,  is  altogether 
visible ;  and  it  would  be  absurd  to  make  an  invisible  quality 
the  criterion  of  visible  communion.  If  then  we  are  incompe- 
tent to  determine  with  certainty  who  is  and  who  is  not  a  genu- 
ine Christian,  and  cannot  therefore  in  the  nature  of  things, 
make  the  reality  of  conversion  the  test  of  admission,  what  is 
to  be  done  1 — Answer  :  The  gospel  informs  us  that  "  faith 

'Jer.  xvii.  10. 


APPENDIX.  347 

worketh  by  love,"  or  in  other  words,  that  regeneration  of  heart 
exhibits  itself  by  corresponding  acts  of  obedience ;  when 
therefore,  according  to  our  best  knowledge,  we  perceive  that 
love  to  God  and  man,  which  is  the  legitimate  fruit  of  living 
faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  or  those  acts  of  obedience  which  are  the 
known  and  regular  effects  of  regeneration,  we  are  bound  to 
account  their  possessor  a  brother  and  to  embrace  him  accord- 
ingly. So  also  when  we  have  reason  to  believe  that  we  be- 
hold those  endeavors  which  necessarily  result  fram  sincere 
anxiety  to  become  a  Christian,  it  is  our  duty  to  regard  him 
who  puts  forth  such  endeavors,  as  sincere  in  his  professions, 
as  an  "  obedient  subject  of  divine  grace,"  and  to  extend  to 
him  all  the  facilities  at  our  disposal  and  encourage  him  in  his 
sincere  intentions. 

From  all  these  remarks  we  accordingly  conclude,  that  a 
credible  profession  of  Christianity,  in  relation  to  the  one  class  of 
individuals,  and  a  credible  prof ession  of  sincere  anxiety  to  become 
a  Christian,  in  reference  to  the  other,  is  all  that  we  have  a  right 
to  require  from  candidates  for  confirmation.  We  may  be  de- 
ceived ;  our  utmost  caution  may  be,  and  often  has  been,  inef- 
fectual to  prevent  hypocrites  and  other  unworthy  individuals 
from  entering  into  the  church  ; — we  are  not  omniscient.  But 
we  have  no  right  to  suspect  sincerity,  to  refuse  privileges,  or 
to  inflict  censure,  where  we  can  put  our  finger  upon  nothing 
repugnant  to  the  love  of  Ged  and  the  fruits  of  faith,  or  to  the 
diligent  efforts  of  upright  desire. 

We  have  great  pleasure  in  assuring  our  readers  that  the  con- 
clusion at  which  we  have  now  arrived,  accords  very  nearly 
with  the  result  of  a  discussion  on  the  "  Visible  Church,"  by 
one  of  the  ablest  theological  writers  of  our  country ;  we  allude 
to  the  late  distinguished  Dr,  Mason,  of  New  York.  He  sums 
up  his  ideas  on  this  point,  in  the  following  language  : — "  A 
profession,  then,  of  faith  in  Christ,  and  of  obedience  to  him,  not 
discredited  by  other  traits  of  character,  entitles  an  adult  to  the 
privileges  of  his  church.''''^ 


No.  III. 
CONFIRMATION. 

CONTINUED. 

OBJECTIONS   TO    CONFIRMATION    ANSWERED,    AND    TESTIMONY 
IN    ITS    FAVOR. 

Many  objections  have  been  urged  against  confirmation,  but 
for  the  most  part  they  proceed  from  a  want  of  acquaintance 

'See  Christ.  Mag.  v.  i.  p.  22. 


348  APPENDIX. 

with  its  nature  and  advantages,  from  its  occasional  abuse  and 
from  sectarian  prejudices.     They  mostly  need  little  more  than 
a  simple  statement,  to  expose  their  fallacy.     We  shall  there- 
fore dispose  of  them  in  a  very  sumary  manner. 
It  is  objected — 

1.  That  confirmation  consists  principaUij  in  committing  the 
catechism  to  rnemory,  and  in  beinir  pronounced  viorthy  to  partake 
of  the  Lord'^s  supper.  From  what  has  been  said,  it  is  abundantly 
evident  that  tliis  is  altogether  an  unfounded  assertion,  without 
even  the  shadow  of  truth  to  extenuate  the  enormity  of  its  tur- 
pitude. 

2.  That  it  is  an  assumption  of  nev)  and  burdensome  duties. 
This  objection  evinces  a  total  misajiprehension  of  the  rite,  and 
involves  gross  ignorance  of  the  general  relation  which  we  sus- 
tain to  God.  Whether  we  are  confirmed  or  not,  we  are  'all 
solemnly  bound  to  repent  and  be  converted  and  live  wholly 
unto  God,  and  confirmation  contemplates  no  more  than  this, 
and  therefore  imposes  no  obligations  that  were  not  previously 
upon  us. 

3.  That  it  is  the  means  of  introducing  people  into  the  chwrch 
at  too  early  an  age. — 7'his  objection  lies  not  against  the  rite 
itself,  but  against  its  application.  Under  the  Old  Testament 
dispensation  tbe  custom  was,  to  receive  candidates  into  church- 
membership  at  the  age  of  twelve  and  thirteen  ;  in  latter  days 
our  Presbyterian  and  Methodist  brethren  have  frequently  ad- 
mitted thern  at  an  earlier  period.  The  great  majority  of  those 
who  receive  confirmation  in  the  Lutheran  church  in  this  coun- 
try, are  from  fiftf;en  to  twenty  years  of  age ;  too  many  of  them 
alas,  defer  it  to  a  later  period.  Are  those  who  are  old  enough 
deliberately  and  voluntarily  to  engage  in  the  service  of  sin  and 
Satan,  and  to  prepare  themselves  to  lie  down  in  "  everlasting 
burnings,"  too  young  to  covenant  with  God,  and  dedicate 
themselves  to  his  service  ?  We  never  confirm  them  at  an  age 
earlier  than  this. 

4.  That  it  in  a  mere  external  ceremony  submitted  to  liy  com- 
pukion,  or  as  a  matter  of  course.  This  is  an  argument  against 
its  abuse,  and  may  be  employed  with  equal  force  against  bap- 
tism, against  a  puhlic  profession  of  religion  as  it  is  sometimes 
practised  in  sister  churches,  against  every  religious  ordinance 
and  indeed  against  religion  in  general.  But  the  abuse  of  a 
religious  ritf;  does  not  abolish  its  proper  use. 

5.  That  it  is  a  scheme  for  making  proselytes.  If  the 
"  scheme"  succeeds  well  in  making  proselytes  to  Christ  the 
objection  is  one  of  the  highest  commendations,  and  we  would 
on  this  ground  alone  warmly  recommend  it  to  others.  But 
our  "  proselytes"  are  generally  the  lambs  of  our  own  flocks, 
but  if  we  can  also  gather  in  those  who  are  "wandering  on  the 


APPENDIX.  349 

dark  mountains  of  sin,"  every  true  Christian  vrill  bid  us 
»•  God  sperd."  But  for  one  church  to  charge  another  with 
eudeavorinir  to  make  proselytes,  in  litis  a^e  of  unparalleled 
seotarisin,  is  venturinsr  on  lUiicatc  grrouud.  It  rather  behooves 
all  to  lay  their  hands  upon  their  mouths,  and  their  moudis  into 
the  dust,  and  plead  guilt i/.' 

t>.  That  it  is  a  remnant  (f  popery.  Tlvis  is  an  unfortunate 
objection ;  for  if  contirmation  \\"as  not  practised  by  the  apos- 
tles, it  certainly  was  in  use  in  the  sccoiui  century.  Every  one 
acquainted  with  church  history,  knows  this.  But  popery  was 
not  introduced  until  the  beginniiiir  of  the  seventh  century.  Is 
it  a  relic  of  popery  because  in  the  tit"teenth  century.  Pope  Eu- 
genius  erected  it  into  a  sacrament  ?  then  matrimoity  and  minis- 
terial onlinatiou  are  also  nnnnants  of  popery  :  for  both  are 
reo;arded  as  sacraments  in  that  corrupt  church.  Then  Calvin 
also  countenanced  popery,  for  he  \\-as  a  warm  advoi-ate  of  the 
rite  of  contirmation. 

7.  That  persons  conjirmed,  frequetUltf  violate  thtir  promises  in 
after  life.  So  do  those  who  make  a  profession  of  religion  in 
any  other  mode ;  shall  all  relioious  profession  therefore  for- 
ever cease  ?  ^lany  who  enter  into  the  matrimoitial  covenant, 
violate  ihtjir  eng-aoements  in  subsequent  life,  must  that  holv 
and  divinely  instituted  sutte  therefore  be  abolished.  But  the 
objection  is  too  frivolous  to  deserve  notice. 

8.  That  it  was  not  ap^hu'i}teti  bi/  Christ  nor  practised  by  the 
apostks.  Neither  were  Sunday  schools,  tract  societies,  6ible 
and  temperance  societies,  &c.;  nor  do  we  read  that  thev  r*^ 
commended  special  days  of  thanksoivin<j,  and  of  humiliation 
and  prayer.  S'eiiher  the  ••Westminster  Confession,"  so  much 
revered  by  one  branch  of  Christ's  chua^h:  nor  tlte  ••  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,"  so  warmly  connnendedby  another;  nor  the 
'•  Book  of  Discipline,"  so  highly  esttxnnevl  by  a  thinl.  was  ap- 
pointed by  Christ  or  observed  in  all  their  derailed  minutia'  by  the 
apostles.  Tliert"  are  many  practices  in  the  churv^h  of  God  at  pre- 
sent, which  are  in  themselves  excellent,  and  worthy  of  all  pnuse. 
but  yet  cannot  claim  the  authority  of  specilic  divine  appoint- 
m«nt  or  of  apostolic  ex-ample.  The  objtvtion  acconlinirlv 
proves  too  much,  and  therefou^  entindv  tails.  Whether  con- 
firmation was  practised  by  the  apostles  or  not,  is  <j  mot>ted 
point;  many  good  and  wise  men  of  dirteriMit  denominations, 
especially  in  the  church  of  England,  think  it  w;\s.'  But  in 
tl\e  Lutheran  chuudi  the  custom  rt^sts  upon  a  ditlerent  basis  ; 
we  value  it  highly  and  adhere  to  it  with  divided  pnnVrtMtce, 
on  tlte  ground  of  utiiiti/.     If  candidates  are  suitably  prepartxi 

'Wo  would  here  take  occasion  toobsojve  that  the  views  and  prac- 
tice of  the  Gornum  Refonneil  church  on  tliis  subject,  >-erv  much  or 
eutirely  resemble  Uioso  of  tlie  Lutherans. 

30 


3'50  APPENDIX. 

personally  to  renew  the  covenant  of  grace  and  enter  into  full 
communion,  we  can  think  of  nothing  more  appropriate  as  a 
mode  of  receiving  them,  than  the  rite  of  confirmation.  It  is  so 
simple  and  at  the  same  time  so  solemn,  so  significant  and 
affecting,  that  it  cannot  fail  to  impress  both  the  new  members 
and  the  whole  congregation  with  a  deep  sense  of  God's  infinite 
mercy  and  their  own  obligations  to  love  and  serve  him. 

9.  That  it  is  indirectly  elevated  above  the  rank  of  a  sacrament  i 
hishops  perform  conjirmaiion,  while  baptism  and  the  eucharist  are 
administered  by  the  inferior  clergy.  This  indeed  strikes  us  as 
an  inconsistency,  but  the  objection  applies  not  to  the  Lutheran 
church.  We  have  no  "  inferior  clergy"  in  point  of  grade  or 
privilege.  We  are  all  bishops  in  our  own  churches,  belon^ng 
io  the  same  order  and  enjoying  the  same  rights  ;  the  principal 
differences  existing  among  us,  are  those  which  arise  from  in- 
herent personal  advantages,  such  as  superior  talents,  learning, 
piety,  usefulness,  &c.  This  difficulty  then  does  not  attach  to 
us,  and  must  be  settled  with  "  diocesan  episcopacy." 

10.  That  it  is  superfluous,  inasmuch  as  the  Lord''s  supper 
answers  every  purpose  contemplated  by  confirmation,  and  is  liable 
to  no  exception.  Among  all  the  objections  urged  and  dwelt 
upon  with  so  much  emphasis  by  Dr.  Miller,  of  Princeton, 
this  is  the  only  one  that  can  apply  to  the  Lutheran  church. 
In  reply,  we  ask,  if  we  have  in  the  Lord's  supper  just  such  a 
solemnity  as  we  need  for  the  end  in  question,  why  have  our 
brethren  of  the  Presbyterian  church  introduced  a  ceremony  of 
their  own,  whereby  a  profession  of  religion  is  made  i  Do 
they  not  require  candidates  for  adult-membership  to  appear 
before  their  "church-session,"  and  enter  into  certain  engage- 
ments, preparatory  to  receiving  the  holy  supper? — do  they 
not  also  in  some  churches,  call  forth  candidates  in  the  presence 
of  the  whole  congregation,  and  exact  certain  promises  from 
them,  as  pre-iequisite  to  their  admission  to  full  communion? 
now  what  is  this  else  but  a  specific  "  transaction  or  solemnity 
by  which  young  people  who  have  been  baptized  in  infancy, 
may  be  called  to  recognize  their  religious  obligations,  and,  as 
it  were,  take  upon  themselves  the  profession  and  the  vows 
made  on  their  behalf  in  baptism]"— in  a  word,  what  is  it  but 
another  mode  of  confirmation,  with  the  exception  that  it  is  not 
accompanied  by  the  laying  on  of  hands  and  all  those  solemn 
and  affecting  circumstances,  nor  preceded  by  that  protracted 
and  highly  beneficial  course  of  religious  instruction,  which 
characterize  and  give  so  much  interest  and  value  to  the  usage 
observed  among  Lutherans  ]  If  accordingly,  the  Lord's  sup- 
per renders  confirmation  needless  and  useless  in  the  Lutheran 
church,  why  does  it  not  supersede  certain  forms  or  usages, 
preliminary  to  the  celebration  of  the  supper  among  Presbyte- 
rians ?     It  would  seem  therefore  that  a  special  solemnity  as  a 

^ Infant  Baptism,  p.  117. 


APPENDIX.  351 

mode  of  admission  to  the  Lord's  supper,  is  necessary ;  the 
want  of  it  is  sensibly  felt  and  provided  for  in  most  churches, 
and  the  solemnity  which  commends  itself  most  strongly  to  the 
understanding  and  hearts  of  Lutherans,  is  the  very  rite  that 
we  now  advocate. 

Moreover,  with  all  deference  for  the  learning  of  our  venera- 
ble and  justly  venerated  opponent,  we  would  ask,  whether 
there  is  not  a  difference  between  admission  to  church-privileges 
and  the  enjoyment  of  them  1  The  person  who  is  to  be  con- 
firmed is  in  a  course  of  reception  into  full  communion,  but  he 
who  partakes  of  the  Lord's  supper  is  already  in  the  possession 
of  that  blessing.  Confirmation  designates  transition  from 
infant  to  adult  membership,  as  als9  does  the  making  of  a  pro- 
fession of  religion  among  our  Presbyterian  brethren ;  but  sac- 
ramental communion  publishes  the  completion  of  that  transi- 
tion, and  is  to  be  regarded  rather  as  one  of  the  privileges  of 
the  new  relation  for  which  application  is  made,  than  as  the 
mode  of  conferring  that  relation.  If  we  are  mistaken,  why  do 
not  our  dissenting  brethren  at  once  admit  applicants  to  the 
Lord's  supper,  without  any  intermediate  form  whatever  ] — 
While  they  then  in  theory  deny  the  propriety  of  this  rite,  does 
not  their  own  procedure  seem  to  indicate  that  in  practice  they 
feel  its  necessity,  and  have  therefore  adopted  a  substitute  1 

But  there  is  another  reason  why  we  are  compelled  to  oppose 
the  doctor's  view.  The  hold  which  this  ancient  custom  has 
upon  our  members,  enables  us  to  bring  within  our  reach  and 
under  the  influence  of  our  instructions,  a  class  of  youth  whose 
attention  we  could  not  otherwise  so  fully  procure.  We  thus 
have  opportunities  to  adapt  our  religious  teaching  to  the  ca- 
pacities and  wants  of  the  young  and  inexperienced  which  we 
could  not  do  in  the  pulpit.  We  can  create  and  keep  alive 
attention  by  the  questions  we  propound,  and  bring  our  pupils 
into  immediate  contact  with  saving  knowledge,  and  oblige 
them  to  feel  that  they  alone  are  now  the  persoiis  who  are  concerned. 
These  opportunities  are  such  as  every  faithful  minister  of 
Christ  will  rejoice  to  find,  and  will  conscientiously  improve  ; 
and  wo  that  minister  of  the  church  Avho,  possessing  them, 
does  not  make  the  most  of  them?  If  we  relinquish  the  cus- 
tom of  confirmation,  it  will  in  all  probability  be  an  abolition  of 
the  annual  catechizing  of  youth,  and  we  should  thus  deprive 
ourselves  of  one  of  the  most  effective  and  successful  instru- 
mentalities which  God  Almighty  has  placed  in  our  hands,  and 
that  too  in  reference  to  a  class  of  individuals  who  have  attained 
to  an  age,  which  is  peculiarly  interesting,  and  renders  special 
attention  particularly  necessary.' 

'See  a  very  able  and  lucid  article  on  confirmation,  by  the  Rev. 
Dr.  Mayer,  of  the  Ger.  Ref.  church,  which  appeared  in  the  paper 
of  that  church  (if  we  mistake  not)  in  the  year  1832. 


352  APPENDIX. 

The  testimony  of  the  Rev.  Professors  Robinson  and  Hodge 
on  this  subject,  shall  conclude  this  article  : 

"  It  is  moreover  not  to  be  denied,  that  this  system  of  in- 
struction, in  the  hands  of  a  faithful  pastor  affords  one  of  the 
most  powerful  means  that  can  be  devised  of  operating  upon 
the  youthful  mind,  and  forming  it,  under  God,  to  habits,  and 
feelings,  and  principles  of  virtue  and  religion.  The  usual 
time  for  confirmation  is  about  the  age  of  puberty,  or  from  the 
thirteenth  to  the  sixteenth  year;^  and  custom  has  ordained  that 
every  one  shall  take  upon  himself  the  solemn  obligations  im- 
posed by  this  rite.  The  youthful  mind  is  at  this  period  in  its 
most  susceptible  state,  and  most  open  to  conviction,  and  to  the 
influence  of  the  thrilling  motives  and  tender  remonstrances, 
which  a  good  shepherd  knows  how  to  urge  in  behalf  of  Him 
who  was  '  meek  and  lowly  of  heart.'  He  meets  his  youthful 
flock  frequently,  and  has  the  opportunity,  if  he  does  his  duty, 
of  becoming  thoroughly  acquainted  with  their  different  charac- 
ters and  dispositions;  so  that  it  is  his  fault  alone,  if  he  be  not 
able  to  apply  to  each  the  instructions  and  exhortations  which 
the  nature  of  the  case  requires.  In  its  present  shape,  this  sys- 
tem owes  its  birth  to  the  pious  Spener;  and  through  this  insti- 
tution that  godly  man  still  exerts  an  amount  of  influence  that  is 
incalculable  :  Have  not  the  churches  of  our  own  land  reason  to 
blush,  when  they  look  upon  what  is  thus  done  in  other  lands 
for  the  religious  education  of  the  young?" — Prof.  Robinson. 

"In  the  Lutheran  church,  you  probably  know,  it  is  custom- 
ary that  boys  at  the  age  of  fourteen,  and  girls  at  fifteen,  should 
be  confirmed  ;  that  is,  be  called  upon  to  assume  their  baptismal 
vows,  and  solemnly  recognize  themselves  as  members  of  the 
church.  That  there  are  serious  evils  attending  this  usage,  is 
very  obvious,  but  that  much  good  is  effected  by  the  pastoral 
attention  to  the  young,  which  it  occasions,  cannot  be  denied. 
The  candidates  for  confirmation,  each  year,  are  formed  into  a 
class  or  classes,  to  which  it  is  the  pastor's  duty  to  devote  sev- 
eral hours  in  every  week,  instructing  them  in  the  principles  of 
the  gospel  and  of  their  own  particular  church.  This  course  of 
instruction  continues  through  the  year ;  and  as  every  child 
must  be  confirmed,  the  whole  mass  of  the  people,  rich  and 
poor,  from  the  king's  son  to  the  children  of  the  peasant,  are 
regularly  indoctrinated  in  the  Christian  system.  The  degree 
of  fidelity  with  which  this  duty  is  performed,  depends  on  the 
character  of  the  pastor;  but  it  may  be  remarked  that  even  the 
rationalists,  in  general,  retain  the  fuse  of  Luther's  cate- 
chism and  other  evangelical  formulas  in  the  instruction  of  the 
young.  I  have  witnessed  few  scenes  more  impressive  than 
the  induction  of  one  of  these  little  flocks  of  the  lambs  of 

'In  the  United  States  the  usual  time  is  from  the  fourteenth  to  the 
twentieth  year. 


APPENDIX.  353 

Christ,  into  his  sacred  fold.  On  the  day  appointed  for  this 
service  they  came  to  the  church,  with  their  pastor  at  their  head. 
Their  entrance  was  greeted  with  a  burst  of  cheerful  music,  in 
which  all  hearts  and  voices  joined.  Arranged  before  the 
pulpit,  the  pastor  proceeded  to  explain  to  them  the  situation  in 
which  they  stood.  Consecrated  to  God  in  baptism,  they  had 
been  given  to  the  church  by  their  parents ;  but  now  having 
attained  an  age  at  which  they  were  capable  of  acting  for  them- 
selves, having  been  instructed  in  the  doctrines  and  require- 
ments of  the  Christian  religion,  and  in  the  faith  and  discipline 
of  their  own  church ;  they  were  to  decide  whether  they  would 
remain  in  that  church,  receive  its  doctrines,  and  submit  to  its 
watchful  care.  For  the  satisfaction  of  those  present,  their 
pastor  examined  them  on  the  history  and  doctrines  of  the  Bible, 
received  their  profession  of  faith,  and  solemn  assent  to  be  re- 
garded as  under  the  guardianship  of  the  church.  They  knelt 
before  him,  the  name  and  the  blessing  of  God  was  invoked 
upon  them,  and  they  arose  in  a  new  relation  to  the  household 
of  faith."— Pro/.  Hodge. 


No.  I. 

BAPTISMAL    REGENERATION.! 

"  I.  The  doctrine  referred  to,  as  held  by  some  Protestants, 
in  its  most  objectionable  form,  appears  to  be  this : — that  the 
spiritual  change  which  the  Scriptures  designate  by  the  term  re- 
generatiun,  is  always  attendant  upon  and  effected  by,  the  rite 
of  baptism  when  duly  administered ;  that  on  the  one  hand, 
every  person,  infant  or  adult,  who  has  been  baptized  by  an 
authorized  minister,  is  a  regenerated  person;  and  that,  on  the 
other,  every  person  who  has  not  been  baptized,  however  deep 
or  mature  his  penitence  and  faith,  is  still  unregenerate.  In 
short,  the  pssition  is,  that  the  inward  grace  of  regeneration 
always  accompanies  the  outward  sign  of  baptism ;  that  they 
are  inseparable;  that  the  one  cannot  exist  without  the  other; 
that  he  who  has  been  thus  regenerated,  if  he  die  without  fall- 
ing from  grace,  is  certainly  saved ;  that  baptism  is  essential  to 
salvation;  and  that  to  call  by  the  name  of  regeneration  any 
moral  change,  from  the  love  of  sin  to  the  love  of  holiness, 
which  takes  place  either  before  or  after  baptism,  is  unscriptural 
and  absurd.  This,  as  I  understand  tliem,  is  the  doctrine 
maintained  by  Bishop  Tomline,  Bishop  Marsh,  Bishop  Mant, 
and  a  number  of  other  writers,  of  equal  conspicuity,  in  the 
church  of  England,  and  by  not  a  few  divines  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  church  in  our  own  country. 

'This  essay,  as  well  as  the  succeeding  one,  is  abbreviated  and  some- 
what altered  from  "  Additional    Notes"  by   Dr.    Miller.     See   liis 
Infant  Baptism,  p.  102,  sqq. 
30* 


S54  APPENDIX. 

"This  doctrine,  we  apprehend,  is  contrary  to  Scripture;  con- 
trary to  experience;  contrary  to  the  declared  opinion  of  the 
most  wise,  pious,  and  venerated  divines ;  and  adapted  to  generate 
the  most  dangerous  errors  with  regard  to  Christian  cliaracter, 
and  the  gospel  plan  of  salvation. 

"1.  It  is  contrary  to  Scripture.  Without  regeneration,  the 
Scriptures  declare,  it  is  impossible  to  enter  into  the  kingdom 
of  heaven.  But  the  penitent  malefactor  on  the  cross  undoubt- 
edly entered  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  if  we  are  to  credit 
our  Lord's  express  declaration.  Yet  this  penitent,  believing 
malefactor  was  never  baptized,  therefore  he  was  regenerated 
without  baptism ;  and  of  course,  regeneration  and  baptism  are 
not  inseparably  connected.  Again,  Simon  Magus  received  the 
outward  and  visible  ordinance  of  baptism,  with  unquestionable 
regularity,  by  an  authorized  administrator ;  yet  who  will  ven- 
ture to  say,  that  he  received  the  'inward  and  invisible  grace' 
signified  and  represented  in  that  ordinance'?  He  was  evidently 
from  the  beginning  a  hypocrite,  and  remained,  after  baptism, 
as  before,  '  in  the  gall  of  bitterness  and  in  the  bond  of  iniquity.' 
Therefore  tlie  outward  and  sensible  sign,  and  the  inward  and 
invisible  grace  are  not  in  all  cases,  or  necessarily,  connected. 
Again  :  it  is  evident  that  the  Apostle  Paul,  Lydia,  the  Ethio- 
pian eunuch,  the  Philippian  jailor,  &c.  'believed  with  the 
heart,'  and  were,  consequently,  brought  into  a  state  of  accept- 
ance with  God  before  they  were  baptized.  But  we  are  told 
(John  i.  12,  13)  that  as  many  as  believe  have  been  'born 
of  God,'  and  made  the  'sons  of  God.'  Of  course  regenera- 
tion mai/  take  place  in  the  case  of  adults,  ous;kt  to  take  place? 
and  in  these  cases,  did  take  place,  before  baptism ;  and,  conse- 
quently, is  not  the  same  thing  with  baptism,  or  inseparably  con- 
nected with  that  rite.  Once  more;  we  are  assured  in  Scrip- 
ture, that  '  he  who  is  born  of  God,  or  regenerated,  doth  not 
commit  sin  (that  is  deliberately  or  habitually),  for  his  seed  re- 
maineth  in  him,  and  he  cannot  sin,  because  he  is  born  of  God ;' 
and  farther,  that  every  one  that  loveth  is  '  born  of  God'  and 
'knoweth  God;'  and  that  'whosoever  believeth  that  Jesus  is 
the  Christ,  is  born  of  God.'  But  can  it  be  said  that  this  char- 
acter belongs  to  all  who  are  baptized  ]  Or,  that  none  who 
are  unbaptized  manifest  that  they  possess  it.  Surely  no  one 
in  his  senses  will  venture  to  make  the  assertion.  Therefore  a 
man  may  be  'born  of  God'  before  he  is  baptized,  and,  conse- 
quently, the  administration  of  the  outward  ordinance,  and  that 
work  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  called  in  the  word  of  God  regenera- 
tion, are  not  always  connected. 

"  2.  The  doctrine  before  us  is  as  contrary  to  experience  as  it 
is  to  Scripture.  'It  is  asserted,'  says  an  eminent  divine  of  the 
church  of  England,  now  living — '  It  is  asserted,  that  the  spirit- 
ual change  of  heart  called  regeneration  invariably  takes  place 


APPENDIX.  355 

in  the  precise  article  of  baptism.  If  this  assertion  be  well 
founded,  the  spiritual  change  in  question  will  invariably  take 
place  in  every  adult  at  the  identical  moment  when  he  is  bap- 
tized ;  that  is  to  say,  at  the  very  instant  when  the  hand  of  the 
priest  brings  his  body  in  contact  with  the  baptismal  water;  at 
that  precise  instant  his  understanding  begins  to  be  illumina- 
ted, his  will  to  be  reformed,  and  his  affections  to  be  purified. 
Hitherto  he  has  walked  in  darkness  ;  but  now,  to  use  the  scrip- 
tural phrase,  he  has  passed  from  darkness  to  light.  Hitherto 
he  has  been  wrapped  in  a  death-like  sleep  of  trespasses  and 
sins;  but  now  he  awakes,  and  rises  from  the  dead,  Christ  him- 
self giving  him  life.  Hitherto  he  has  been  a  chaos  of  vice, 
and  ignorance,  and  spiritual  confusion ;  the  natural  man  re- 
ceiving not  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  for  they  are  fool- 
ishness unto  him :  but  now  he  is  created  after  God  in  right- 
ousness  and  true  holiness  ;  being  in  Christ  he  is  a  'new  crea- 
ture;' having  become  spiritual,  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God 
are  no  longer  foolishness  to  him;  he  knows  them  because  they 
are  spiritually  discerned.  Such  are  the  emphatic  terms  in 
which  regeneration  is  described  by  the  inspired  writers.  What 
we  have  to  do,  therefore,  we  apprehend,  is  forthwith  to  inquire, 
whether  every  baptized  adult,  without  a  single  exception,  is 
invariabl}''  found  to  declare,  that  in  the  precise  article  of  bap- 
tism, his  soul  experienced  a  change  analogous  to  that  which  is 
so  unequivocally  set  forth  in  the  above  mentioned  texts  of 
Scripture."'  We  need  not  dwell  long  on  the  inquiry.  The 
fact  is  notoriously  not  so.  Does  experience  evince,  that  every 
subject  of  baptism,  who  has  reached  an  age  capable  of  mani- 
festing the  Christian  character,  does,  at  the  moment  of  receiving 
the  baptismal  water,  show  that  he  is  the  subject  of  that  regen- 
erating power  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  bj'  which  '  old  things  are 
passed  away,  and  all  things  become  new  in  the  Lord  V  No  one 
who  has  a  particle  of  intelligence  or  candor  can  imagine  that 
any  such  fact  exists ;  but  if  it  do  not,  then  the  doctrine  under 
consideration  falls  of  course. 

"  3.  The  doctrine  of  baptismal  regeneration  is  contrary  to 
the  declared  opinion  of  the  most  pious,  judicious,  and  venera- 
ble Protestant  divines,  including  those  of  the  very  highest  au- 
thority in  the  church  of  England.  In  support  of  this  asser- 
tion, the  most  explicit  quotations  might  be  presented  from  the 
writings  of  those  distinguished  martyrs  and  prelates,  Cran- 
mer,  Latimer,  Ridley,  and  Hooper;  and  after  them  from  the 
writings  of  the  eminent  bishops,  Jewell,  Davenant,  Hall, 
Usher,  Reynolds,  Leigh  ton,  Hopkins,  Tillotson,  Beveridge, 
Burnet,  Seeker,  and  a  host  of  other  divines  of  the  English 
church,  of  whose  elevated  character  it  would  be  little°less 
than  an  insult  to  any  intelligent  reader  to  attempt  to  offer  testi- 

^Faber''s  Sermons,  Vol.  i.  p.  145,  146. 


356  APPENDIX. 

mony.  All  these  men  declare  in  the  most  solemn  manner, 
against  the  doctrine  of  baptismal  regeneration,  in  the  sense 
which  we  are  now  considering.  Indeed,  we  cannot  call  to 
mind  a  single  writer  of  that  church,  from  the  time  of  Arch- 
bishop Cranmer  to  the  present  hour,  who  had  the  least  claim 
to  the  character  of  an  evangelical  man,  who  did  not  repudiate 
the  doctrine  which  we  are  now  opposing ;  and  not  a  few  of 
them  denounce  it  as  popish,  and  adapted  to  subvert  the  whole 
system  of  vital  and  spiritual  religion. 

"4.  The  last  argument  which  we  shall  urge  against  the 
doctrine  of  baptismal  regeneration,  is,  that  it  is  adapted  to 
generate  the  most  fatal  errors  with  regard  to  the  gospel  plan 
of  salvation. 

"  So  far  as  this  doctrine  is  believed,  its  native  tendency  is, 
to  beget  a  superstitious  and  unwarranted  reliance  on  an  exter- 
nal ordinance ;  to  lower  our  estimate  of  that  inward  spiritual 
sanctification  which  constitutes  the  essence  of  the  Christian 
character;  in  fact,  to  supersede  the  necessity  of  that  spiritual 
change  of  heart,  of  which  the  Scriptures  speak  so  much,  and 
for  which  the  most  holy  and  eminent  servants  of  Christ  have, 
in  all  ages,  contended.  The  truth  is,  the  doctrine  now  under 
consideration  is  the  very  same  in  substance,  with  the  doctrine 
of  the  opus  operatum  of  the  Papists,  which  all  evangelical  Pro- 
testants have  been  opposing  for  more  than  three  hundred  years, 
as  a  mischievous  delusion.  Accordingly,  the  popish  charac- 
ter and  fatal  tendency  of  this  error  have  been  unreservedly  ac- 
knowledged by  many  bishops,  and  other  pious  divines  of  the 
church  of  England,  as  well  as  by  many  of  the  same  denomi- 
nation in  this  country. 

"  Further ;  if  regeneration,  which  is  the  commencement  of 
holiness  in  the  soul,  is  always  communicated  in  baptism,  then 
it  follows,  as  indeed,  those  who  entertain  this  doctrine  dis- 
tinctly avow, — that  baptism  invariably  places  its  subject  in  a 
state  of  salvation ;  so  that  every  baptized  person  who  dies  im- 
mediately after  the  administration  of  this  sacrament,  is  infalli- 
bly sure  of  entering  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  If  this  doctrine 
were  fully  believed,  would  not  every  thinking,  anxious  parent 
refrain  from  having  his  child  baptized  in  infancy,  and  reserve 
the  ordinance  for  an  hour  of  extremitj^  such  as  the  approach 
of  death,  that  it  might  serve  as  an  unfailing  passport  to  glory? 
Would  it  not  be  wise  in  every  adult  who  may  be  brought  to  a 
knowledge  of  the  Saviour,  from  paganism,  or  from  the  world, 
to  put  off  his  baptism  to  the  last  hour  of  his  life,  that  he  might 
be  sure  of  departing  in  safety  1  This  is  well  known  to  have 
been  one  of  the  actual  corruptions  of  the  fourth  century,  grow- 
ing out  of  the  very  error  which  we  are  now  opposing.  'It 
was  the  custom  of  many,'  says  Dr.  Mosheim,  '  in  that  century, 
to  put  off  their  baptism  till  the  last  hour ;  that  thus  immedi- 
ately after  receiving  by  this  rite  the  remission  of  their  sins, 


APPENDIX.  357 

they  might  ascend  pure  and  spotless  to  the  mansions  of  lite 
and  immortality.'  This  is  no  far-fetched  or  strange  conceit. 
It  is  the  native  fruit  of  the  doctrine  before  us.  Nay,  if  we 
suppose  this  pernicious  theory  to  take  full  possession  of  the 
mind,  would  it  not  be  natural  that  a  tender  parent  should  anx- 
iously desire  his  child  to  die  immediately  after  baptism;  or 
•even,  in  a  desperate  case,  to  compass  its  death,  as  infallibly  for 
its  eternal  benefit ?  And,  on  the  same  principle,  might  we  not 
pray  for  the  death  of  every  adult,  immediately  after  he  had  re- 
ceived baptism,  believing  that  then  'to  die  would  certainly  be 
gainl'  In  fine,  we  see  not,  if  the  doctrine  be  true,  that  a  re- 
generating and  saving  efficacy  attends  every  regular  baptism 
— we  see  not  how  we  can  avoid  the  conclusion,  that  every 
pagan,  whether  child  or  adult,  that  can  be  seized  by  force,  and 
however  thoughtless,  reluctant  or  profane,  made  to  submit  to 
the  rite  of  baptism,  is  thereby  infallibly  made  'a  child  of  God, 
and  an  inheritor  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven]' 

"These  consequences,  which  appear  to  me  demonstrably  to 
flow  from  the  theory  in  question,  afford  sufficieni  evidence  that 
it  is  an  unscriptural  and  pernicious  error,  even  if  na  other 
means  of  refutation  could  be  found. 

"It  is  not  forgotten  that  language  which  seems,  at  first 
view,  to  countenance  the  doctrine  which  we  are  opposing,  is 
found  in  some  of  the  early  fathers.  Some  of  them  employ 
terms  which  would  imply,  if  interpreted  literally,  that  baptism 
and  regeneration  were  the  same  thing.  But  the  reason  of  this 
is  obvious.  The  Jews  were  accustomed  to  call  the  converts  to 
their  religion  from  the  gentiles  little  children,  and  their  intro- 
duction into  the  Jewish  church,  a  netu  birth,  because  they  were 
brought,  as  it  were,  into  a  neiv  moral  world.  Accordingly,  cir- 
cumcision is  repeatedly  called  in  »Scripture  '  the  covenant,''  be- 
cause it  was  the  sign  of  the  covenant.  Afterwards,  when  bap- 
tism, as  a  Christian  ordinance,  became  identified  with  the  re- 
ception of  the  gospel,  the  early  writers  and  preachers  began 
to  call  this  ordinance  regeneration,  and  sometimes  illumination, 
because  every  adult  who  was  baptized,  professed  to  be  born  of 
God,  illuminated  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  By  a  common  figure  of 
speech,  they  called  the  sign  by  the  name  of  the  thing  signified. 
In  the  truly  primitive  times  this  language  was  harmless,  and 
well  understood ;  but  as  superstition  increased,  it  gradually 
led  to  mischievous  error,  and  became  the  parent  of  complicated 
and  deplorable  delusions. 

"II.  But  there  is  another  view  of  the  doctrine  of  baptismal 
regeneration,  which  is  sometimes  taken,  and  which,  though 
less  pernicious  than  that  which  has  been  examined,  is  still,  I 
apprehend,  fitted  to  mislead,  and  of  course,  to  do  essential 
mischief;  It  is  this  :  That  baptism  is  that  rite  which  marks 
and  ratifies  the  introduction  of  its  subject  into  the  visible  king- 


358  APPENDIX. 

dom  of  Christ;  that  in  this  ordinance  the  baptized  person  is 
brought  into  a  new  state  or  relation  to  Christ,  and  his  sacred 
family;  and  that  this  new  state  or  relation  is  designated  in 
the  Scripture  by  the  term  regeneration,  being  intended  to  ex- 
press an  ecclesiastical  birth,  that  is,  being  "  born"  into  the  vis- 
ible kingdom  of  the  Redeemer.  Those  who  entertain  this 
opinion  do  not  deny,  that  there  is  a  great  moral  change,  wrought 
by  the  Spirit  of  God,  which  must  pass  upon  every  one,  before 
he  can  be  in  a  state  of  salvation.  This  they  call  conversion, 
renovation,  &c. ;  but  they  tell  us  that  the  term  ^'■regeneration''^ 
ought  not  to  be  applied  to  this  spiritual  change  ;  that  it  ought 
to  be  confined  to  that  change  of  stale  and  of  relation  to  the  visi- 
ble kingdom  of  Christ  which  is  constituted  by  baptism  ;  so  that 
a  person,  according  to  them,  may  be  regenerated,  that  is,  regu- 
larly introduced  into  the  visible  church,  without  being  really 
born  of  the  Spirit.  This  theory,  though  by  no  means  so  fatal 
in  its  tendency  as  the  preceding,  still  appears  to  me  liable  to 
the  following  serious  objections. 

"1.  It  makes  an  unauthorized  use  of  an  important  theologi- 
cal term.  It  is  vain  to  say,  that,  after  giving  fair  notice  of  the 
sense  in  which  we  use  a  term,  no  misapprehension  or  harm  can 
result  from  the  constant  use  of  it  in  that  sense.  The  plea  is 
insufficient.  If  the  s^nse  in  question  be  an  unusual  and  es- 
pecially an  unscriptural  one,  no  one  can  estimate  the  mischief 
which  may  result  from  the  use  of  it  in  that  sense.  Names  are 
so  closely  connected  with  things,  that  it  is  of  the  utmost  im- 
portance to  preserve  the  nomenclature  of  theology  from  per- 
version and  abuse.  If  the  sense  of  the  word  "regeneration" 
which  is  embraced  in  this  theory,  were  now  by  common  con- 
sent admitted,  it  would  give  an  entirely  new  aspect  to  all  those 
passages  of  Scripture  in  which  either  regeneration  or  baptism 
is  mentioned,  making  some  of  them  unmeaning,  and  others 
ridiculous ;  and  render  unintelligible,  and  in  a  great  measure 
useless,  if  not  delusive,  nine-tenths  of  the  best  works  on  the 
subject  of  practical  religion  that  have  ever  been  written. 

"2.  But  there  is  a  more  serious  objection.  If  men  be  told 
that  every  one  who  is  baptized,  is  thereby  regenerated — 
"born  of  God" —  'born  of  the  Spirit," — made  a  "new  crea- 
ture in  Christ," — will  not  the  mass  of  mankind,  in  spite  of 
every  precaution  and  explanation  that  can  be  employed,  be 
likely  to  mistake  on  a  fundamental  point ;  to  imagine  that  the 
disease  of  our  nature  is  trivial,  and  that  a  trivial  remedy  for  it 
will  answer ;  to  lay  more  stress  than  they  ought  upon  an  ex- 
ternal rite ;  and  to  make  a  much  lower  estimate  than  they 
ought  of  the  nature  and  necessity  of  that  holiness  without 
which  no  man  shall  see  the  Lord  ] 

"But  it  maybe  asked,  is  there  any  beneficial  influence, 
physical  or  moral,  necessarily  and  in  all  cases,  connected  with  the 


APPENDIX.  359 

due  administration  of  this  sacrament  1  I  answer,  none  at  all. 
The  washing  with  water  in  this  ordinance  is  an  e//i6/eniand  <\.sign 
of  precious  benefits  ;  it  holds  forth  certain  great  truths,  which 
are  the  glory  of  the  Christian  covenant,  and  the  joy  of  the 
Christian's  heart;  it  is  a  seal  affixed  by  God  to  his  covenant 
with  his  people,  Avhereby  he  certifies  his  purposes  of  grace, 
and  pledges  his  blessing  to  all  who  receive  it  with  a  living 
faith  ;  nay,  it  is  the  seal  of  valuable  outward  privileges,  even 
to  those  who  are  not  then,  or  at  any  other  time,  '  born  of  the 
Spirit;'  as  a  solemn  rite  appointed  by  Christ,  it  is  adapted  to 
make  a  solemn  impression  on  the  serious  mind  ;  but  when  it 
is  administered  to  the  persons,  or  the  offspring  of  those  Avho 
are  entirely  destitute  of  faith,  there  is  no  pledge  or  certainty 
that  it  will  be  accompanied  with  any  blessing.  They  receive 
the  ivater,  but  not  the  Spirit.  They  are  engrafted  into  the 
visible  church,  but  not  into  the  spi  itual  body  of  Christ,  and 
are  after  baptism,  just  as  they  were  before,  like  Simon  the 
sorcerer,  '  in  the  gall  of  bitterness  and  in  the  bond  of 
iniquity.'" 


No.  V. 


THE    WESTMINISTER    ASSEMBLY    RESPECTING    BAPTISM. 

"  In  opposing  baptism  as  practised  among  us,  our  Baptist 
brethren  frequently  refer  to  the  Westminister  Assembly  of 
divines,  asserting  that  when  the  question  was  put  in  that  As- 
sembly, whether  baptism  should  be  performed  by  sprinkling 
or  immersion,  it  was  carried  in  favor  oi  sprinkling,  by  a  major- 
ity of  one  only.  This  is  wholly  incorrect.  When  the  com- 
mittee who  had  been  charged  with  preparing  a  '  Directory  for 
the  worship  of  God,'  brought  in  their  report,  they  had  spoken 
of  the  mode  of  baptism  thus:  ^ It  is  lawful  and  sufficient  to 
sprinkle  the  child.''  To  this  Dr.  Lightfoot,  among  others,  ob- 
jected; not  because  he  doubted  ofthe  entire  sufficiency  of  sprink- 
ling ;  for  he  decidedly  preferred  sprinkling  to  immersion  ;  but 
because  he  thought  there  was  an  impropriety  in  pronouncing 
that  mode  lawful  only,  when  no  one  present  had  any  doubts 
of  its  being  so,  and  when  almost  all  preferred  it.  Others 
seemed  to  think,  that  by  saying  nothing  about  dipping,  that 
mode  was  meant  to  be  excluded,  as  not  a  lawful  mode.  This 
they  did  not  wish  to  pronounce.  When,  therefore,  the  clause, 
as  originally  reported,  was  put  to  vote,  there  were  twenty-five 
votes  in  tavor  of  it,  and  twenty-four  against  it.  After  this 
vote,  a  motion  was  made  and  carried,  that  it  be  recommitted. 


360  APPENDIX. 

The  next  day,  when  the  committee  reported,  and  when  some 
of  the  members  still  seemed  unwilling  to  exclude  all  mention 
of  dipping.  Dr.  Lightfoot  remarked,  that  to  say  that  pouring 
or  sprinkling  was  lau'fuJ,  would  be  '  all  one  as  saying,  that 
it  was  laivful  ,to  use  bread  and  wine  in  the  Lord's  supper.' 
He,  therefore,  moved  that  the  clause  in  the  '  Directory'  re- 
specting the  mode  of  baptism,  be  expressed  thus  : 

"  '  Then  the  minister  is  to  demand  the  name  of  the  child, 
which  being  told  him,  he  is  to  say  [calling  the  child  by  his 
name] — 

" '  1  baptize  thee  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost: 

" '  As  he  pronounceth  these  words,  he  is  to  baptize  the  child 
with  water,  which,  for  the  manner  of  doing  it,  is  not  only 
lawful,  but  sufficient,  and  most  expedient  to  be,  hj  pouring  or 
sprinkling  of  the  water  on  the  face  of  the  child,  without  adding 
any  other  ceremony.'  This  was  carried.  See  Lightfoofs 
Life,  prefixed  to  the  first  volume  of  his  Works,  (folio  edition), 
p.  4 ;  compared  with  Neale^s  History  of  the  Puritans,  vol.  ii. 
p.  106,  107,  compared  with  the  Appendix,  No.  II.  (quarto 
edition),  where  the  'Directory,'  as  finally  passed,  is  given  at 
full  length. 

"We  do  not  learn,  precisely,  either  from  Lightfoot's  biogra- 
pher (who  was  no  other  than  the  indefatigable  Strype),  or 
from  Neale,  by  what  vote  the  clause,  as  moved  by  Lightfoot, 
was  finally  adopted ;  but  Neale  expressly  tells  us,  that  '  the 
Directory  passed  the  Assembly  with  great  unanimity.'' 

"  From  this  statement,  it  is  evident,  that  the  question  which 
was  carried  in  the  Assembly,  by  a  majority  of  one,  was  not 
whether  affusion  or  sprinkling  was  a  lawful  mode  of  baptism ; 
but  whether  all  mention  of  dipping,  as  one  of  the  lauful  modes 
should  be  omitted.  This,  in  an  early  stage  of  the  discussion, 
was  carried,  by  a  majority  of  one  in  the  affirmative.  But  it 
would  seem  that  the  clause,  as  finally  adopted,  which  certainly 
was  far  more  decisive  in  favor  of  sprinkling  or  affusion,  was 
passed  "  with  great  unanimity  J'"'  At  any  rate,  nothing  can  be 
more  evident,  than  that  the  clause  as  it  originally  stood,  being 
carried  by  one  vote  only,  and  afterwards,  when  recommitted, 
and  so  altered  as  to  be  much  stronger  in  favor  of  sprinkling, 
and  then  adopted  without  difficulty,  the  common  statement  of 
this  matter  by  our  Baptist  brethren  is  an  entire  misrepresenta- 
tion." 


THE  END. 


INDEX. 


PART    FIRST 

CHAPTER  I. 

BAPTISM  IN  GENERAL. 


Pasre 


A  definition  of — is  a  sacrament, — means  of  grace, — sign  and 
seal  of  a  covenant, — recognition  of  church-member- 
ship,— illustrated  by  "  Traveller's  Society," — not  strict- 
ly initiatory, — true  version  of  the  words  of  the  institu- 
tion,— by  whom  and  how  to  be  administered, — private 
baptism  (noth-taufe) — why  water  was  selected  as  an 
emblem, — how  to  be  applied, — baptizing  inanimate 
objects, — profession  of  religion, — required  of  adults 
but  not  of  infants, — should  be  sincere, — objection  an- 
swered,— corroborative  evidence  .  .  .       5 — 19 

CHAPTER  H. 

THE  CHURCH  OF  GOD. 

Scriptural  significations  of  this  plirase, — never  means  a 
house  of  worship, — different  relations  of  a  baptized 
person  to  the  church  in  its  several  senses, — illustration 
drawn  from  ministerial  ordination, — baptism  is  not 
initiatory  ......     20 — 24 

CHAPTER  HI. 

ARGUMENTS  AND  OBJECTIONS  ON  THE  SUBJECT  OF 
INFANT  BAPTISM. 

First  Argument. — Christ  has  commanded  it,  which  com- 
mand is  of  universal  application, — infant  baptism  pre- 
vailed prior  to  the  Christian  era, — testimony  of  Mai- 
31 


362 


Page 

monides  in  reference  to  adult  proselyte-baptism, — Dr. 
Gill's  assertion, — evidence  from  Epictetus, — Calmet, 
—Dr.  Wall,— Stackhouse,— Witsius,— Dr.  A.  Clarke 
and  others, — Dr.  Wood's  argument, — infant  proselyte- 
baptism, — testimony  of  Maimonides, — Selden,  Light- 
foot,  Dr.  A.  Clarke,  Mr.  Bootli, — infant  church-mem- 
bership,— existed  mrder  old  dispensation, — never  re- 
voked ......     25 — 32 


CHAPTER  IV. 

OBJECTIONS  TO  PRECEDING  ARGUMENT. 

First  Objection — The  command  of  Christ  does  not  ex- 
pressly require  the  baptism  of  infants, — answer  to  this 

objection, — Lightfoot                ....  33 — 34 

Second  Ojection. — Children  cannot  be  instructed  and  can- 
not believe,  therefore  preposterous  to  baptize  them, — 
answer  to  this  objection, — Dr.  Mason's  mode  of  treat- 
ing it, — also  Edwards'  exposure  of  its  fallacy               .  34 — 44 

Third  Objection. — Teaching,  repenting,  believing,  &c., 

must  always  precede  baptism ;  answer  to  this  objection  44 — 45 


CHAPTER  V. 

Second  Argument. — Baptism  is  the  appointed  token  of 
I  church-membership.  (1)  Children  were  entitled  to 
membership  in  the  church  under  the  old  dispensation, 
and  circinncision  was  the  sign  of  it;  (2)  the  church 
under  the  Old  and  New  Testament  substantially  the 
.same, — Rev.  Doct.  Schmucker's  (jun.)  argument; 
(3)  children  are  members  of  the  church  under  the  new 
dispensation  by  virtue  of  their  birth  from  Christian  pa- 
rents,— Dr.  Mason  on  this  subject; — (4)  baptism  is  the 
appointed  token,  &c. — doctrine  of  substitution  ex- 
plained and  vindicated, — Justin  Martyr         -         -  46 — 56 


CHAPTER  VI. 

OBJECTIONS  TO  PRECEDING   ARGUMENT. 

First  Objection. — Baptism  is  a  positive  institution,  and 
nothing  short  of  a  rfhrci  mid  explicit  command  can  jus- 
tify its  administration  to  infants, — answer  to  this  ob- 
jection _._-_.     57 — 5S 

Second  Objection. — If  baptism  was  substituted  for  cir- 
cumcision, how  came  it  that  both  were  in  full  force  at 
the  same  time,  that  Timothy  received  both,  and  that 
both  were  practised  among  some  of  the  Hebrew  Cliris- 
tians  ? — answer  to  this  objection  -  -  .     68 — 62 


INDEX.  363 

Page 

Third  Objection. — Tf  baptism  succeeded  in  the  place  of 
circumcision,  why  is  the  former  not  as  imiversal  in  the 
Christian  as  the  latter  was  in  the  Jewish  church? — 
answer  to  this  objection  ....  62 

Fourth  Objection. — If  baptism  has  been  substituted  for  cir- 
cumcision, why  is  not  the  former  limited  to  male  infants 
as  the  latter  was  1 — answer  to  this  objection  .     62 — 64 

Fifth  Objection. — If  infants  are  members  of  God's  church 
in  virtue  of  their  birth  from  Christian  parents,  why  are 
they  not  treated  as  members? — answer  to  this  objec- 
tion,— duty  of  the  church  towards  children, — duty  of 
parents, — Dr.  Miller  of  Princeton       .  .  .     65 — 69 

Sixth  Objection. — If  infants  are  bom  members  of  the 
church,  what  is  to  hinder  them  from  coming  to  the 
Lord's  supper  ? — answer  to  this  objection, — illustrations     69 — 72 

Seventh  Objection. — If  the  children  of  Christian  parents 
are  bom  members  of  the  church,  what  need  have  they 
of  baptism? — answer  to  this  objection  .  .     72 — 73 

Eighth  Objection. — On  the  Pedol)aptist  principle  all  un- 
baptized  children  are  excluded  from  the  church,  and 
therefore  lost, — answer  to  this  objection, — what  is 
meant  by  being  cut  off  from  God's  people? — the 
Friends,  commonly  called  Quakers      .  .  .     73 — 75 


CHAPTER  VII. 

Third  Argument. — There  are  numerous  passages  in  the 
Sacred  Scriptures,  which  cannot  be  consistently  ex- 
plained without  admitting  the  right  of  infants  to  baj}- 
tism;  Matt.  xix.  13 — 15  explained, — Dr.  Schmucker, 
jun'r, — Robert  Hall, — Acts  ii.  38 — 39  explained, — 
Edwards, — 1  Cor.  vii.  14  explained,  Dr.  J.  M.  Mason     76 — 85 

CHAPTER  Vm. 

Fourth  Argument. — The'ancient  practice  of  family-bap- 
tism, which  was  continued  in  the  apostolic  age,  affords 
very  strong  presumptive  evidence  on  this  subject, — 
Lydia's  family, — testimony  of  Clemens  Alexandrinus, 
the  jailor's  flvmily, — that  of  Crispus  and  that  of  Ste- 
phanas, and  of  a  number  of  others, — no  less  than  eleven 
believing  and  no  doubt  baptized  families, — the  Greek 
church, — criticism  on  omoa-  and  ow/a, — meaning  of  the 
term  family  in  Scripture,— editor  of  Calmet,— draft 
of  a  house  as  usually  constructed  in  ancient  ages        .     86 96 


364  INDEX. 

CHAPTER  IX. 

OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  LAST  ARGUMENT. 


Page 


First  Objection. — In  reference  to  the  case  of  the  jailor 
and  his  family, — this  objection  answered, — C.  Taylor, 
— D.  Isaac       ......     97— 9S 

Second  Objection. — In  reference  to  Lydia's  family, — this 
objection  answered, — the  Syriac  and  Coptic  versions, — 
Rev.  Mr.  Sheer,— Dr.  Miller,— Dr.  Wardlaw  .  98— lOS 


CHAPTER  X. 

Fifth  Argument. — The  uniform  practice  of  the  Chris- 
tian church,  from  the  earliest  period  down  to  the 
present  time,  affords  an  unanswerable  argument  in 
favor  of  infant  baptism, — history  of  infant  baptism, 
Peter  de  Bruis,  a  Frenclunan,  the  first  opponent  of 
infant  baptism,  lived  in  the  twelfth  century, — deriva- 
tion of  the  word  Anabaptist, — appeared  first  in  Eng- 
land 1640, — TertuUian,  —  Constantine  the  Great, 
Waldenses, — Origen, — Cyprian, — Council  of  sixty- 
six  bishops  at  Carthage  in  the  third  century, — Fidus, 
— Lord  Chancellor  King,— Chrysostom,— Augustine, 
— Pelagius, — Wall's  History, — tlie  Waldenses, — Pe- 
trobrussians  .....     104 — 120 


CHAPTER  XL 
OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  LAST  ARGUMENT. 

First  Objection. — Infant  baptism  is  a  relic  of  papacy, 
so  says  Rev.  Mr.  Broaddus, — was  engrafted  on  the 
church  at  the  close  of  the  second  century,  according 
to  the  Rev.  Mr.  Judson, — but  took  its  rise  in  Africa, 
according  to  other  Baptist  writers, — answer  to  this 
objection,— TertuUian,— Mr.  Benedict  .  .     121—123 

Second  Objection. — There  is  equally  as  good  authority 
for  infant  communion  as  for  infant  baptism, — answer 
to  this  objection, — how  and  where  infant  communion 
took  its  rise  and  was  discontinued     .  .  .     123 — 126 

CHAPTER  XH. 

Sixth  Argument. — The  names  applied  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament to  small  children  afford  evidence  of  their 
baptism,-r-the  several  appellations  given  to  the  early 
Christians,  such  as  holy  persons,  faithfub,    neivly 


INDEX.  365 

Page 
planted,  &c. — ancient  application  of  these  terms  in- 
discriminately to  infants  and  adults, — as   found  in 
ancient  sepulchral  inscriptions  .  .  .     126 — 130 

CHAPTER  XIII. 

ADDITIONAL  OBJECTIONS. 

First. — Clirist  was  not  baptized  mitil  he  was  thirty  years 
of  age, — answer  to  this  objection, — the  natui'e  and 
design  of  tlie  baptism  administered  to  Christ,  and  of 
Jolin's  baptism  as  administered  to  others, — points  of 
difference  between  it  and  Christian  baptism, — under 
what  law  or  ordinance  Clirist  was  baptized, — Der  be- 
siegte  Wiedertaeufer  ....     131 — 135 

Second. — Baptism  being  the  seal  of  a  covenant,  it  is 
wrong  to  bind  a  child  in  a  covenant  without  its  Imow- 
ledge  or  consent, — answer  to  tliis  objection, — this  ob- 
jection lies  against  God,  and  not  against  Pedobaptists, 
— is  the  offspring  of  infidelity,  and  at  war  with  the 
coimnon  usages  of  life, — illustrations  from  the  Bible, 
— baptism  does  not  involve  new  obligations, — an  ex- 
ample from  the  Scriptures  of  little  children's  being 
bomid  in  covenant  without  their  knowledge  or  con- 
sent ......     135— 13S 

Third. — We  cannot  find  in  the  whole  history  of  the 
New  Testament,  a  single  example  of  the  baptism  of 
children  of  professing  Clu-istians, — answer, — there  is 
no  case  on  record  of  the  baptism  of  adults  born  of 
Christian  parents, — how  to  be  accounted  for  .     13S — 140 

Fourth. — Baptism  can  be  of  no  benefit  to  children ;  what 
good,  says  the  Antipedobaptist,  can  it  do  an  "  uncon- 
scious babe"  to  sprinkle  a  little  water  upon  its  head? 
— answer, — circumcision      ....     140 — 141 


PART    SECOND. 


CHAPTER  I. 

BENEFITS  OF  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

First  Benefit. — It  is  a  sign  of  many  interesting  truths, 
and  a  seal  of  numerous  and  inestimable  blessings, — 
what  these  truths  and  blessings  were, — the  latter 
were,  according  to  the  original  stipulations  of  the 
covenant,  both  temporal  and  sqnrttual, — the  want  of 
faith  on  the  part  of  children  forms  no  just  ground  of 
objection      ......     143 — 147 

31* 


366  INDEX. 


Page 


SEC0>fD  Benefit. — It  is  a  solemn  dedication  of  our  chil- 
dren to  God  by  an  appropriate  rite  of  his  owa  ap- 
pointment,— the  advantages  arising  from  this  dedi- 
cation .....     147 — 149 


CHAPTER  II. 

Third  Benefit. — It  is  a  recognition  and  ratification  of 
the  right  of  membership  in  the  visible  church, 
which  secures  several  inestimable  benefits,  viz. — 
( 1 )  the  special  instruction  and  supervision  of  the 
church  and  its  pastor, — (2)  the  exercise  of  church- 
disciplme      ......     150 — 153 


CHAPTER  HI. 

Fourth  Benefit. — It  secures  to  infants  the  immediate 
and  especial  blessing  of  the  Saviour, — Clu-ist's  la)'ing 
his  hands  on  children, — the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit, — 
considerations  favoring  the  idea  of  the  comminiica- 
tion  of  the  ordinary  influences  of  the  Spirit  at  bap- 
tism ......     154—157 

Fifth  Benefit. — It  renews  the  assurance  to  them  that 
God  is  not  only  their  God,  but  also  "  the  God  of 
their  seed  after  them"  .  .  .  .  •      157 


PART   THIRD. 

CHAPTER  I. 

THE  MODE  OF  BAPTISM. 

Difference  in  opinion  between  Baptists  and  others, — di- 
versity of  sentiment  among  the  Baptists  themselves, 
— proportion  of  submersionists  exceedingly  small, — 
the  Greek  church, — Deylingius, — infant  Baptism 
and  sprinkling  usually  go  together, — ancient  Clu-is- 
tians  baptized  in  a  state  of  nudity, — Dr.  Stuart,  Cyril 
of  Jerusalem,  —  Robinson, — James  Basnage,  —  Dr. 
Wall  ......     158—163 

CHAPTER  II. 

The  mode  of  treating  the  subject  proposed, — the  sense 
in  wliich  submersion  and  sprinkling  with  kindred 


INDEX.  367 

Page 

terms  are  used, — the  literal  terms  used  in  the  New 
Testament  in  reference  to  baptism, — Battto, — the 
meaning  of  this  word, — ilhistrated  by  Rev.  xix.  13; 
Matt.  xxvi.  23;  Dan.  iv.  33,— Dr.  Jowett,— Mr. 
Rich, — Taylor, — illustrated  also  by  a  reference  to 
profane  authors, — Mr.  Carson, — Dr.  Gale, — Hippo- 
crates,— Nearchus,— Mr.  Edwards,— Dr.  John  Dick, 
— Rev.  John  Graves, — Parkhurst  .  .     164 — 171 


CHAPTER  III. 

The  signification  of  Bairn^te, — words  often  depart  from 
their  primitive  ideas,  —  President  Beecher, — illus- 
trated by  the  English  word  spring, — the  editor  of 
Calmet  mentions  more  than  eiglity  examples  in 
which  Bu.TTTi^-Tir  implies  less  than  submersion, — its 
import  illustrated  by  a  reference  to  Mark  vii.  4, — Dr. 
Fisk  and  Dr.  Clarke;  John  iii.  25-26  ;  Hebrews  vi. 
2, — Pitts, — D'Ohsson,  Mr.  Oscanyan, — John  ii.  6, 
— Home, — 1  Cor.  x.  1-2      ....     172 — 182 

CHAPTER  IV. 

The  argument  derived  from  1  Cor.  x.  1-2  continued, — 
the  import  of  BciTm^ai  proven  by  reference  to  profane 
authors, — Origen, — Diodorus  Siculus, — Josephus, — 
tlie  word  itself  affords  no  clue  whereby  we  can  de- 
termine the  mode  of  applying  water  in  baptism, — 
this  illustrated  by  a  reference  to  the  English  term 
wash, — the  copiousness  of  the  Greek  language,  es- 
pecially in  words  signifying  entire  immersion,  but 
none  of  them  used  in  reference  to  baptism, — Rev. 
Mr.  Hibbard,— JsivTi/ov,— Rev.  R.  Watson  .     183—193 

CHAPTER  V. 

The  Greek  Prepositions. — The  several  significations 

of  sii  in  connection  with  baptism       .  .  .     194 — 198 

CHAPTER  VI. 

The  meaning  of  it<r, — illustrated  as  used  Mark  i.  9         .     199 — 200 

CHAPTER  VH. 

The  consideration  of  the  preposition  no-  continued, — Acts 
viii.  38 ;  Pliilip  and  the  eunuch, — reasons  why  the 
eunuch  could  not  have  been  submersed        .  .     201 — 205 


368  INDEX. 

CHAPTER  VIII. 


Page 


The  mode  practised  liy  John  the  Baptizer, — the  Baptist 
argument  derived  from  the  circumstances  of  his  bap- 
tism,— counter  argument,  —  considerations  proving 
that  he  did  not  submerse      ....     206 — 215 

CHAPTER  IX. 

The  consideration  of  John's  baptism  continued, — it  would 
liave  been  impossible  for  him  to  submerse  all  whom 
he  baptized, — the  duration  of  his  ministry  and  the 
number  he  baptized,  investigated     .  .  •     216 — 221 

CHAPTER  X. 

The  apostles'  mode  examined, — as  illustrated  in  a  nimi- 
ber  of  cases, — Acts  ii.  41, — not  only  improbable  but 
impossible  that  the  three  thousand  converted  under 
Peter's  preaching,  could  have  been  submersed  .     222 — 229 

CHAPTER  XL 

The  examination  of  the  apostles'  mode  continued, — the 
case  of  the  eunuch,  Acts  viii.  38, — Dr.  Cave's  Apos- 
tolici 230—232 

CHAPTER  Xn. 

The  foregoing  subject  continued, — the  case  of  Lydia, 
Acts  xvi.  13, — of  Cornelius,  Acts  x.  41 — 48, — Dr. 
Wood  on  this  case, — of  Saul  of  Tarsus,  Actsix.  18, 
of  the  jailor,  Acts  xvi.  32 — 33, — of  Paul  baptizing 
at  Corinth,  Acts  xA'iii.  1 — 8, — and  also  at  Ephesus, 
Acts  xix.  1—5 233—238 

CHAPTER  XIH 

The  figurative  language  of  the  New  Testament  in  refer- 
ence to  baptism, — Rom.  vi.  3 — 5, — eight  objections 
to  the  interpretation  put  on  this  passage  by  Baptists, 
and  the  true  exposition  given, — Mr.  Robinson's  and 
Rev.  Mr.  Judson's  opinion, — Dr.  Wardlaw's  .     239-247 

CHAPTER  XIV. 

The  same  subject  continued, — Col.  ii.  12;  1  Cor.  xv.  29, 

—1  Cor.  X.  1-2,-1  Pet.  iii.  20—21  .  .     248—251 


INDEX.  369 

CHAPTER  XV. 

Page 

The  mode  of  baptism  not  of  such  essential  importance 
that  the  example  would  be  binding  on  us ;  could  it 
be  conclusively  shown  that  either  mode  constituted 
the  primitive  practice? — proneness  to  attach  undue 
weigiit  to  mere  forms, — this  proneness  severely  re- 
buked in  the  Old  and  New  Testament, — no  particu- 
lar mode  has  been  pointed  out  in  the  Bible  to  the 
exclusion  of  every  other  mode         .  .  .     252 — 256 

CHAPTER  XVI. 

Same  subject  continued, — analogy, — the  passover, — Gro- 

tius, — Henry, — the  Lord's  supper  .  .     257 — 262 

CHAPTER  XVn. 

Same  subject  continued, — God  equally  approves  of  sin- 
cere Christians,  whether  baptized  by  submersion  or 
sprinkling, — Dr.  Wood, — the  early  Cliristians  liable 
to  err,  and  to  be  influenced  by  their  peculiar  educa- 
tion and  habits, — the  practice  of  the  church  inclined 
to  shape  itself  according  to  climate  and  habits  of 
people, — feet-washing  ....     263 — 270 

CHAPTER  XVm. 

The  mode  of  baptism  by  affusion  decidedly  more  scriptu- 
ral, appropriate  and  edifying  than  that  by  submei^ 
sion, — it  falls  in  more  harmoniously  with  the  cir- 
cumstances attending  the  several  examples  of  baptism 
recorded  in  the  New  Testament, — is  the  fittest  em- 
blem of  tlie  blessings  intended  to  be  represented  by 
baptism, — the  baptism  of  the  Spirit  .  .     271 — 276 

CHAPTER  XIX. 

Same  subject  continued, — the  practice  of  baptizing  by 
affusion  is  adapted  to  the  designed  universality  of  the 
Christian  religion, — Christianity  intended  to  extend 
over  the  whole  world, — submersion  presents  invinci- 
ble obstacles, — hence  the  Baptists  in  Holland  have 
given  up  the  practice  of  submersing, — Dr.  Miller     .     277 — 282 

CHAPTER  XX. 

Same  subject  continued, — baptism  by  pouring  is  more 
consistent  with  the  simplicity  and  spirituality  of  the 
gospel  than  plunging  ....     283 — 284 


370  INDEX. 

CHAPTER  XXI.  Page 

Same  subject  continued, — the  practice  of  affusion  not 
calculated,  like  the  doctrine  of  submersion,  to  give 
rise  to  any  thing  that  is  indecorous  or  indecent, — 
tlie  submersion  of  females  in  public, — the  baptism  of 
persons  in  a  state  of  nakedness, — Cyprian,  Cyril, 
Athanasius  and  Chrysostom, — affusion  accords  bet- 
ter with  Peter's  definition,  1  Pet.  iii.  21, — no  connec- 
tion between  the  efficacy  of  baptism  and  the  quantity 
of  water  used, — affusion  has  no  tendency  to  super- 
stition and  abuse, — ancient  abuse  of  submersion, — 
modern  abuse, — a  miserable  impostor  .  .     285 — 293 

CHAPTER  XXH. 

Same  subject  continued, — affusion  does  not  interfere  with 
and  destroy  devotional  feeling, — a  revival  of  religion, 
— the  appearance  of  a  Baptist  brother, — effects  there- 
of    .  .  .  .  .  .  .     294—297 

CHAPTER  XXm. 

Same  subject  continued, — affusion  leads  not,  like  sub- 
mersion, to  glaring  absurdities,  —  a  theorem, — ax- 
ioms,— corollaries,  postulates  .  .  .     298 — 303 

CHAPTER  XXIV. 

OBJECTIONS  TO  BAPTISM  BY  AFFUSION. 

First  Objection. — Sprinkling  is  an  insufficient  mode  of 
baptism, — answer  to  this  objection, — it  proceeds  from 
a  false  assumption, — is  contradicted  by  the  coirunon 
sense  of  mankind, — scriptural  evidence        .  .     304 — 308 

Second  Objection. — There  is  no  "  cross"  in  sprinkling, 

— errors  in  respect  to  bearing  the  cross  of  Christ      .     308 — 310 

Third  Objection. — Luther  was  opposed  to  sprinkling 
and  disapproved  of  infant  Imptism, — answer  to  this 
objection, — extracts  from  Luther's  works  respecting 
the  baptism  of  infants,  and  the  mode  of  administer- 
ing the  ordinance     .....     310 — 315 

CONCLUSION. 

The  spirit  in  which  this  work  was  written, — exhortations 
to  parents  and  others, — to  young  people  who  have 
not  yet  personally  made  a  profession  of  religion      .     315 — 323 

APPENDIX. 

I.  Why  a  name  is  given  at  baptism         .  .  .  325 — 327 

II.  Sponsors  at  Baptism  ....  328—332 

III.  Confirmation, — its  nature  and  design  .  .  333 — 339 
"  The  same,— benefits  of  it— qualifications  of  candidates  339 — 347 
"    The  same — objections  to  it  considered            .             .  347 — 353 

IV.  Baptismal  Regeneration        ....  353 — 359 

V.  Westminster  Assembly  ....  359—360 


DATE  DUE 


^^ N^ 

GAYLORD  #3523PI       Printed  in  US; 


